Content
80%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 exceptionally lean and well-structured for a simple skill, with concrete config-aware instructions. Its main gap is the absence of an explicit validation/feedback loop for the routing and description-rewriting operations.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation/feedback step to the checklist, e.g., run the test prompts, confirm routing lands on the intended agent, and re-rewrite descriptions if it does not.
Include one short example of a capability-focused, non-overlapping agent description so the rewrite step is copy-paste concrete.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~25-line body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, with every line earning its place (e.g., "Verify each agent exists in both `agents` and `listeners[].agents`") and no padding or over-explanation, matching anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Steps reference concrete config structures and give specific direction ("Rewrite descriptions to be capability-focused and non-overlapping"), but as an instruction-only skill it lacks executable examples or sample test prompts, leaving minor gaps at anchor 4 rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-step Execution Checklist is clearly sequenced, but routing validation and description rewriting are config-affecting/batch operations with no explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop, which per the rubric caps workflow clarity at 3. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a simple, under-50-line skill with no external references needed and well-organized sections (When To Use, Apply These Rules, Execution Checklist), which per the simple-skill exception qualifies for anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |