Content
70%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured process-oriented skill with strong workflow clarity and excellent progressive disclosure. Its main weakness is the lack of concrete executable examples or output templates—the guidance is specific but remains at the instructional level. There is moderate redundancy across sections (anti-patterns vs constraints, duplicated routing references) that could be tightened.
Suggestions
Add at least one concrete example showing expected output format (e.g., a sample root-cause analysis output or a Linear issue payload template) to improve actionability.
Consolidate the 'Anti-patterns' section into 'Constraints' since they largely mirror each other, and merge the duplicated subagent routing references in 'Full Context' and 'Subagent Routing' sections to improve conciseness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably structured but includes some redundancy (e.g., the 'Full Context' section has overlapping 'Read when' annotations that could be consolidated, and the Subagent Routing section partially duplicates references already listed). Some sections like 'Philosophy' and 'Anti-patterns' overlap with constraints and procedure. However, it avoids explaining basic concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The procedure provides a clear sequence of steps and the constraints are specific, but there are no concrete code examples, commands, or executable snippets. The guidance is specific enough to follow (e.g., 'collect bounded runtime evidence', 'read only tails or targeted matches') but remains at the instructional level without copy-paste-ready artifacts. The examples section only shows prompt strings without corresponding expected outputs or response templates. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 9-step procedure is clearly sequenced with explicit validation gates (Section 'Validation' with fail-fast policy), feedback loops (test one hypothesis at a time, confirm causal chain before proceeding), and clear checkpoints (reproduce before diagnosing, diagnose before fixing, verify before marking fixed). The QA intake branching at step 2 is well-signaled. Missing validation in destructive operations is addressed by the 'fail fast' and verification requirements. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill explicitly positions itself as a 'Progressive Disclosure Entry' with a concise overview and well-organized references to deeper materials. The 'Full Context' section provides clearly signaled one-level-deep references with 'Read when' conditions explaining when each reference is relevant. References are organized by purpose (canonical contract, evals, domain routing, QA intake, runtime evidence, subagent routing). | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |