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 content is concise, well-structured, and actionable, with clean sectioning appropriate for a simple skill. Its main weakness is workflow clarity: a config-fixing task should include an explicit validate-and-retry checkpoint rather than merely returning a verification plan.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation feedback loop to the Execution Checklist, e.g. run `planoai up` (or `planoai config validate`) after patching, and if it fails, fix and re-validate before returning.
Include a minimal before/after config.yaml snippet showing a hardcoded secret replaced with `$ENV_VAR` substitution to make the secrets rule copy-paste concrete.
State the expected `planoai up` success signal (exit code / output line) so the verification step has a clear pass/fail criterion.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and efficient with no padded explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line earns its place, matching the 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence' anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Gives concrete, actionable guidance with specifics like `version: v0.3.0`, exactly one default provider, `$ENV_VAR` substitution, and `planoai up`; minor gaps remain (no example config snippet), fitting the 'mostly executable; minor gaps' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered checklist exists, but for a config-fixing (destructive/batch) operation the verification is only 'Return ... a planoai up verification plan' rather than an explicit validate-then-fix feedback loop, which caps workflow clarity at 3 per the feedback-loop guidance. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, and well-organized into clear sections with no need for external references, qualifying for the top score under the simple-skills exception. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |