Content
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is actionable and well-structured with sound progressive disclosure, but loses points for redundancy between the Commands and Instructions sections and for absent validation checkpoints in the workflow.
Suggestions
Consolidate the Commands and Instructions sections — reference the documented subcommands instead of repeating their syntax, or keep only one canonical command listing.
Add an explicit validation step in the risk workflow (e.g. confirm risk score / verification status before recommending interaction) with a fix-and-retry loop.
Either link the orphaned references/implementation.md from the body or remove it, since its content (crypto-apis.env, Bash(crypto:launch-*)) does not match this skill's actual tooling.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient and free of conceptual filler, but the Instructions section re-states command syntax already shown in Commands (e.g. `python launch_tracker.py recent --chain ethereum`), which could be tightened or cross-referenced. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands with real flags and a concrete address example, backed by the bundled launch_tracker.py script. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The numbered Instructions give a clear sequence (recent → detail → risk → summary → export), but no validation checkpoints or error-recovery feedback loops are shown inline for the risk-before-interaction workflow. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Keeps overview and commands inline while pushing error handling and examples to real one-level-deep references (errors.md, examples.md) and a scripts/ directory, all of which exist in the bundle. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |