Content
76%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.
The body is highly actionable — every operation is a concrete MCP call with exact parameters — and well organized, with useful troubleshooting for common failure modes. Its main weakness is the absence of validation checkpoints around destructive operations (delete, kill, archive), which the rubric caps at 3 for workflow clarity; there is also minor duplication between the step blocks, the resource-type table, and the Performance Notes.
Suggestions
Add a pre-destruction checkpoint: before kill, archive, or delete, fetch flag details via harness_get and confirm the exact flag name (and environment for kill) with the user — kills in the wrong environment can affect production, as the skill itself warns.
Add post-operation verification: after kill/restore/archive, re-fetch fme_feature_flag_definition with the environment_id (or harness_get) to confirm the intended state changed, forming a validate→act→verify loop.
Trim duplication to improve conciseness: the FME Resource Types Reference table and Performance Notes repeat resource_type names and workspace/environment discovery guidance already given in the step blocks — merge or cut the overlapping rows.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly parameter blocks and tables with no concept explanations Claude already knows, but there is minor duplication: the "FME Resource Types Reference" table restates resource_type/workspace_id values already shown in the step blocks, and Performance Notes partly restate the Prerequisites ("Always discover workspace_id and environment_id before kill/restore"). Matches 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' rather than the fully lean anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Every operation is given as a concrete, copy-paste-ready MCP call with exact tool name, resource_type, and named parameters (e.g., "Call MCP tool: harness_execute / action: \"kill\" / environment_id: \"<environment_id>\""), and the Examples section covers the common cases. Fully executable guidance with no gaps. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The sequence is clear (Step 0a workspace discovery → 0b environments → Steps 1–7) with some checks ("List existing flags before creating to avoid duplicates", discover IDs before kill/restore), but the destructive operations — delete, kill, archive — have no pre-confirmation or post-operation verification checkpoint. Per the rubric, destructive operations without validation cap workflow clarity at 3: 'steps listed but validation gaps; checkpoints missing or implicit'. Not 4: the missing confirm/verify loop around delete/kill is exactly the gap the cap targets. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good structure with well-labeled sections (Prerequisites, Instructions, reference table, Examples, Troubleshooting) and appropriately compact inline material. At ~177 lines it exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill exception, and the resource-types table and troubleshooting section are borderline candidates for a separate reference file, so it falls just short of the 'content appropriately split' top anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |