Content
72%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, information-dense handbook: specific patterns with concrete numbers, decision tables by product type, defined output formats, and excellent progressive disclosure via a single verified reference file. The main gaps are an only-implicit workflow sequence with no checkpoints, and the absence of worked examples for the deliverables it asks Claude to produce.
Suggestions
Make the process sequence explicit at the top (e.g., a numbered 'How to run an onboarding engagement' list: 1. Load product-marketing context, 2. Define the activation event, 3. Audit the current funnel, 4. Recommend changes, 5. Define metrics/experiments), so section order becomes a stated procedure.
Add one worked example of the Onboarding Audit output (Finding → Impact → Recommendation → Priority with real-looking content) and a sample empty-state or checklist item, so the output format is unambiguous.
Add a checkpoint before measurement recommendations, e.g. 'Confirm the activation event is instrumented and cohort data exists before proposing funnel targets.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is largely lean — tables, short bullets, specific numbers ("3-7 items," "Max 3-5 steps per tour," "24h, 72h") — with almost no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. A few generic motivational lines ("Show advancement. Celebrate completions. Make the path visible.") and slight overlap between the email-coordination and stalled-user sections keep it below the 'every token earns its place' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, specific guidance throughout: decision tables with best-for/risk tradeoffs, exact item counts and timing windows, output templates ("Finding → Impact → Recommendation → Priority"), and a task-specific question list. Minor gaps: no worked example of an audit output or sample empty-state/email copy, so it sits at 'mostly executable with minor gaps' rather than fully turnkey. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The intended sequence (assess context → define activation → audit/design → measure → output) is only implicit in section ordering; it is never framed as ordered steps, and validation checkpoints are absent (e.g., nothing like 'confirm the activation event is instrumented before recommending metrics'). This matches the 'sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit' anchor. The destructive/batch cap does not apply since the work is advisory. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The SKILL.md body is a well-organized overview and appropriately delegates the experiment catalog to a single clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference ("For comprehensive experiment ideas: See [references/experiments.md](references/experiments.md)"), which exists as a real, well-structured file. Navigation is easy and no content that belongs in a separate file is inlined. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |