Content
48%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 densely engineered formal contract: its workflow sequencing and validation logic are genuinely strong, with explicit gates and error-recovery paths for the carrier-write and handoff failure modes. But it buries that clarity under extreme verbosity — an inline Lean specification of nearly 900 lines plus triple restatement in prose — and never once shows a worked example of the sheet or emission it demands, leaving execution to inference despite highly specific structural instructions.
Suggestions
Move the ~870-line Lean formal block to a reference file (e.g. references/contract.lean) loaded only when formal detail is needed, keeping SKILL.md to the protocol prose — the same occasion-bound loading principle round-composition.md already applies (conciseness, progressive_disclosure).
Add one worked example: a small sample sheet (goal, one or two units with certificates, authority lines, focus) and the matching emission, so the demanded output form is shown rather than inferred (actionability).
Deduplicate the Rules section against Protocol — statements like "every line drawn on every sheet" and the handoff- obligations rule appear nearly verbatim three or more times; keep each rule once and cross-reference (conciseness).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is ~1050 lines dominated by an ~870-line inline Lean formalization, a single-sentence ~450-word "Definition" paragraph, and the same plan-sheet content restated across Definition, Core Principle, Protocol, and Rules — "Every line is drawn on every sheet" and its companions appear in nearly identical words three or more times. This is noticeably verbose with several padded/redundant sections; it avoids anchor 1 only because it does not explain concepts Claude already knows — the padding is novel-but-duplicated contract material, not filler. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete procedural guidance exists ("On a taking, emit one entry per unit with its whole certificate — every check, every accepted gap, every held-open item... Park the packaged plan in one durable carrier and emit a navigation block that points to it"), and relay/exception conditions are specific. But there is no worked example — no sample sheet, unit, certificate, or emission format — and dense contract vocabulary ("contrary grounds", "the host's standing procedural contract") leaves the executor to infer most output form. "Some concrete guidance but incomplete" fits; not 4 because executing this still requires heavy interpretation. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The FLOW comment and the apportion/start definitions give a real sequence (ground pointer → pass → sheet → Stop; taking → emit → park carrier → record → handoff) with explicit validation gates (Closable, Recorded, tooThin relay) and error-recovery loops ("Where the carrier write comes back incomplete, nothing closes: the sheet is drawn again and says what the .recordHandoff grounding names"). "Clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps" fits — not 5, because the flow must be synthesized from scattered sections rather than read as one explicit checklist, and validation is expressed as abstract predicates rather than runnable checks. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well-organized with clear headers, and references/round-composition.md is a real, well-signaled, one-level-deep reference with explicit load conditions ("Read references/round-composition.md before composing when terminology must remain stable, wording must travel unchanged..."). However, the ~870-line Lean formal block inlined in SKILL.md is precisely the content that belongs one level deep — the reference file itself states the occasion-bound loading principle the formal block violates — leaving "content that should be separate is inline". Fits anchor 3; not 2 (structure and signaling are otherwise good), not 4 (the monolithic inline block is a major placement gap, not a minor one). | 3 / 5 |
Total | 12 / 20 Passed |