Content
86%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 tight, well-structured instruction-only skill: lean prose, concrete methods, a defined charter cycle with stop/escalation rules, and explicit exit criteria. The main gap is the absence of worked examples (e.g., a filled-in charter) that would make the guidance fully copy-paste ready.
Suggestions
Add one worked example of a filled-in charter (e.g., 'Test hypothesis: stale cache serves old config, using instrument (correlation-ID logs) to explain why settings revert after restart') so the template is concrete rather than abstract.
For the non-bisect methods, include one concrete command or pattern each (e.g., a correlation-ID log line format, or how to stub a dependency in a typical setup) to lift actionability from technique description to executable guidance.
Make the per-charter record explicit — a two-line 'hypothesis / result / ruled-out' log format — so the feedback loop between charters is verified rather than implied.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~20-line body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — 'git bisect between a known-good and the broken commit', 'stub one dependency at a time' — with zero padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Methods are concrete and executable (bisect with known-good/broken commits, minimize, instrument with correlation IDs, isolate by stubbing) and the charter template 'Test hypothesis <H> using <method> to explain <symptom>' is directly usable. Below anchor 5 because several methods stay at the technique-description level with no worked example of a filled-in charter or concrete commands beyond git bisect. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The loop is well-defined: write hypothesis before testing, record result after, stop after 3 failed hypotheses and report what's ruled out, and explicit exit criteria ('A confirmed root cause with evidence, or an escalation note'). Minor validation gaps — the charter cycle itself has no explicit check that a hypothesis result was recorded before moving to the next charter — keep it below anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a simple skill under 50 lines with no need for external references, and the body is organized into clear sections (Methods, Rules, Exit criteria) with a single well-signaled cross-skill pointer ('qa-exploratory-charters'). Per the simple-skill exception, well-organized sections alone warrant anchor 5; no bundle files exist to reference. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |