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.
The body is an exemplar of lean, high-signal instruction: a numbered procedure with concrete mechanisms, a named-semantics checklist, a probe-validation step, and explicit exit criteria. The only gaps are a missing example probe script and an explicit recovery path when a probe fails.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every line instructs ('Find the exact installed version (lockfile, `/version`, API version header)', 'Record each finding: source URL, version, claim, probe result') with zero padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Not 4: there are no over-explanations to trim at all. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete mechanisms throughout — version discovery via 'lockfile, `/version`, API version header', a specific semantics checklist ('error codes, retries, idempotency keys, webhook signatures, time zones, caching'), and a defined record format. Not 5: the probe step ('a tiny script that confirms the documented behavior') lacks a copy-paste example, and version-detection is named but not shown as an executable command. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 5-step sequence with an explicit validation gate (step 4 probe plus 'Exit criteria' checklist: 'Every third-party assumption in the fix plan has a source and a probe result'). Not 5: no explicit error-recovery loop telling Claude what to do when the probe contradicts the documented behavior; that minor gap matches the anchor for 4. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A ~15-line skill with clean section structure ('Procedure', 'Exit criteria') and no content that warrants external reference files; per the rubric's simple-skill guidance this earns a 5. No nested or buried references exist. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |