Content
78%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 well-structured instructional skill body: an efficient overview with a clear six-step workflow and exemplary single-file progressive disclosure. It falls short of top marks on actionability (no inline executable examples) and workflow clarity (no explicit failure-recovery loops), and carries some redundancy across the covered/when-to-use/constraints sections.
Suggestions
Merge the 'What is covered in this Skill?' and 'When to use this skill' bullet lists (they overlap heavily and largely repeat the frontmatter trigger list) into one section to cut duplicate tokens.
Add one short inline code snippet in the body — e.g., a minimal typed toggle decision-point or both-paths unit test — so the most common implementation pattern is executable without opening the reference file.
Insert an explicit feedback loop in the workflow, such as 'If release/rollback review or both-paths tests fail, revise the toggle contract and boundaries before re-testing', to give the sequence error-recovery checkpoints.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is disciplined and assumes Claude's competence (no concept re-teaching), but "What is covered in this Skill?", "When to use this skill", and the Constraints section partially restate one another and the frontmatter trigger list, so minor trimming is possible — anchor 4 ('efficient; minor instances… could be trimmed'), not 3 since there is no unnecessary explanation, only structural overlap. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Steps give concrete checklists ("toggle type, stable name, typed decision API, default state, evaluation context, fallback behavior, audit needs, metrics, logs, and cleanup trigger") but the body contains no executable code or commands — all Java examples live in the reference — so it fits 'mostly executable guidance; minor gaps' rather than the copy-paste-ready anchor 5, and comfortably above the vague/pseudocode anchors. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear six-step sequence (classify → design → boundaries → review → test → report) with review and test checkpoints, but no explicit feedback loops or error-recovery guidance (no 'if review fails, revise the contract and re-check'), which keeps it below anchor 5's 'explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery'. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a lean overview that routes all detail to a single verified, well-signaled, one-level-deep reference (references/057-design-feature-toggles.md), linked in the constraints, workflow step 1, and a dedicated Reference section — matching 'clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references' exactly; anchor 4 would require organization gaps that are not present. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |