Content
63%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-organized, token-efficient contract-style body with a clear workflow and genuine validation discipline. Its weaknesses are the absence of any concrete decision criteria or comparison guidance for choosing among Skill, Custom Prompt, and Agent — the skill's entire purpose — and a progressive-disclosure pointer to an archive path that does not match the provided bundle files.
Suggestions
Add a short decision rubric or mapping that ties the listed inputs to a primitive (e.g. which autonomy level or trigger frequency favors a Skill vs. Custom Prompt vs. Agent), since the body currently directs the workflow without ever explaining how to compare the options.
Include one concrete example of the expected output (single recommendation, tradeoffs, non-goals, validation path) so the deliverable format is unambiguous.
Fix the Progressive Disclosure section to reference the actual bundle files (references/contract.yaml, references/evals.yaml, references/task-profile.json) instead of an archive path outside the bundle, or move those files under the referenced directory.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — one-line bullets like "Prefer the smallest reversible step that proves or disproves the current assumption" with no re-explanation of concepts Claude already knows. It sits just below the lean-and-efficient anchor because sections like Philosophy and Constraints carry some generic process filler that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | There is some concrete guidance — named inputs ("trigger frequency", "autonomy level", "constraints"), named primitives in "Deciding between Skill, Custom Prompt, and Agent automation", and a five-step workflow — but the core decision logic is missing: no criteria mapping inputs to a primitive, no comparison dimensions, and no example of the recommended output. This fits the anchor for some concrete but incomplete guidance rather than the minimal-hints anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | "1. Classify the requested mode... 4. Stop at the first failed gate or blocker... 5. Rerun the relevant validation after fixes" is a clear sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and a fix-then-rerun feedback loop, reinforced by the Validation section ("Fail fast: stop at the first failed gate"). It does not reach 5 because the steps are abstract directives ("Take the smallest action that advances the confirmed goal") rather than concrete, executable checkpoints. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well-organized and a dedicated Progressive Disclosure section exists, but it points to "Infrastructure/references/deferred-skill-context/agent-ops-decide-build-primitive/", a path not present in the bundle, while the actual bundle files (references/contract.yaml, references/evals.yaml, references/task-profile.json) are never referenced from the body. Scored against the actual bundle structure, this matches the anchor for references present but not correctly signaled. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |