Content
68%Weight 40%Scale 1-5Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A highly actionable, well-sequenced skill body whose main costs are redundancy (a 'Performance Notes' section that repeats earlier steps, and YAML duplicated across body and reference) and a missing post-update validation step when modifying an existing shared pipeline. Structure and progressive disclosure are in good shape.
Suggestions
Delete or merge the 'Performance Notes' section into the relevant steps — every bullet there restates a rule already stated in Steps 1-6.
Replace the three near-identical YAML blocks in Step 5 with one parameterized template (noting that only identifier/name/type/config vary) and rely on references/scanner-types.md for per-scanner blocks, which already contains them.
Add a validation step after the harness_update call in Step 7: re-fetch the pipeline (or check the update response) to confirm the scanner step is present and the YAML is intact, and save the original pipeline YAML before modifying it so the change can be rolled back.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The procedural steps are lean and concrete, but the 'Performance Notes' section restates rules already given in Steps 1-6 (e.g., 'Automatically extract the repository connector from the pipeline configuration', 'Default to Harness Code scanner unless...'), and the three near-identical YAML blocks in Step 5 duplicate both each other and content in references/scanner-types.md. Mostly efficient, but there is real redundancy to trim. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully executable: concrete MCP tool calls with parameters (harness_get, harness_update), copy-paste-ready STO step YAML for the default and common scanners, exact connector paths ('pipeline.properties.ci.codebase.connectorRef'), a step-identifier regex, and a pipeline URL template. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 8 steps are clearly sequenced and include a mid-flow checkpoint (halting when no codebase connector is found), but there is no validation after the harness_update call — no re-fetch or verification that the scanner step was inserted, and no preserving of the original pipeline YAML before modifying shared infrastructure. Per the rubric cap, a consequential modify-in-place operation without a validation checkpoint cannot score above 3. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The single bundle file references/scanner-types.md is real, one level deep, and clearly signaled ('Reference references/scanner-types.md for scanner-specific configuration'). However, the non-default scanner YAML blocks inlined in Step 5 (Bandit, Semgrep) duplicate what the reference already provides, which is a minor content-placement gap rather than a structural one. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |