Content
93%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, lean instruction-only skill with strong actionability and clean progressive disclosure. The main gap is modest: validation in the workflow is a single density guard without an explicit fix-and-retry feedback loop.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validate-then-fix-retry loop in the Deepening Loop (e.g., run `pnpm skill:validate` after each candidate change and only proceed when it passes), to strengthen workflow_clarity toward 5.
Clarify what counts as passing the `pnpm skill:validate` density guard so the checkpoint is unambiguous rather than implicit.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient throughout; it assumes Claude's competence, defines only project-specific vocabulary (module/interface/seam/depth) rather than basic concepts, and every section earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance throughout — specific file reads, a concrete "deletion test" heuristic ("if deleting the module removes complexity, it was pass-through"), explicit dependency categories, and a defined candidate-output schema; absence of code is appropriate for this instruction-only skill. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered five-step workflow plus a five-step deepening loop with a validation checkpoint ("pnpm skill:validate"), but validation is light (a single density guard) with no explicit error-recovery feedback loop for the candidate-grilling step. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized overview with a table of contents and clearly signaled one-level-deep references (language.md, deepening.md, interface-design.md, context-and-decisions.md), all of which exist as real bundle files. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |