Content
68%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 a lean, well-organized instruction-only skill with a clear step sequence, a concrete error-handling table, and an appropriately disclosed formulas reference. It is weakened by high-level steps with no inline executable detail, a referenced 'comparison template' that does not exist in assets/, and the absence of validation checkpoints in the workflow.
Suggestions
Ship the 'comparison template' in assets/ (or point step 1 at a concrete section of references/variance-formulas.md) so "Import budget and actual data into comparison template" resolves to a real artifact.
Inline the core formulas (Variance = Actual - Budget, Variance % = (Actual - Budget)/ABS(Budget), and the materiality IF flag) in the Instructions steps, or cite variance-formulas.md at the exact step where each formula is needed rather than only in Resources.
Add an explicit validation step, e.g. after step 5 verify that the waterfall bridge components sum to the total variance and that report totals reconcile to the source budget/actual data, with a fix-and-recheck loop if they do not.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~50-line body is lean with tight sections (Prerequisites, Instructions, Output, Error Handling, Examples, Resources) and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section carries actionable information, matching the 'every token earns its place' anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Instructions like "Apply materiality thresholds for flagging" and "Generate variance waterfall chart" name specific steps but give no inline formulas, commands, or workbook structure (all executable detail is delegated to references/variance-formulas.md), and step 1's "comparison template" has no corresponding file in assets/, matching the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details' anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The five-step sequence (import, calculate, flag, drill down, chart) is clearly ordered, but there are no validation checkpoints (e.g., verifying the waterfall bridge reconciles to total variance or totals tie to source data); the Error Handling table is post-failure remediation rather than a workflow checkpoint, matching the 'sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit' anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well structured with a clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference ([`references/variance-formulas.md`](references/variance-formulas.md) for calculation templates) that exists in the bundle, matching the 'good structure; references mostly clear; minor organization gaps' anchor; the gaps are the missing 'comparison template' asset referenced in step 1 and placeholder boilerplate READMEs in scripts/ and assets/ that the body never uses. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |