Content
92%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, concise debugging workflow with explicit validation checkpoints, a hypothesis feedback loop, and a verification checklist. The only gap is the lack of concrete test-runner commands, which keeps actionability just below fully copy-paste ready.
Suggestions
Add one or two concrete test-runner command examples (e.g. `pytest -x path::test` / `npm test -- --grep`) to push actionability toward fully executable.
Optionally note how to scope a single test in common frameworks so 'Execute ONLY the failing test' has an executable analogue.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient throughout: it assumes Claude knows how to run tests and read logs, with no padded explanations of concepts. Every numbered step earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, actionable instruction ('Execute ONLY the failing test', 'Run the failing test after each change', 'Run the full test suite') with clear minimal-fix guidance. Not a 5 because, as an instruction-only skill, it gives no specific copy-paste test-runner commands (e.g. `pytest -x`), leaving the exact invocation implicit. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear three-phase sequence with explicit validation checkpoints (run failing test first as baseline, re-run after each change, full-suite verify) and a feedback loop ('If the hypothesis is incorrect, create a new one') plus a closing checklist. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no need for external references and no bundle files present; the body is well-organized into phased sections plus a verification checklist, satisfying the simple-skill exception. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |