Content
86%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.
An efficient, well-structured instruction skill that points to a single policy owner and gives a crisp sequenced workflow with a verification checkpoint. It stops just short of perfect actionability and workflow clarity because its steps are heuristics without an explicit failure-feedback loop.
Suggestions
Add an explicit feedback loop for the failing-case step, e.g. 'If the failing case does not fail, the test is not asserting the intended behavior — revise before proceeding.'
For the test-deletion recommendation (a destructive action), note a verification step such as confirming the deleted test's behavior is covered elsewhere before removal.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Roughly a dozen lean lines that assume Claude's competence, defer policy to an external owner, and contain no padded explanations or taught concepts — every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | As an instruction-only strategy skill it gives concrete, specific heuristics (smallest boundary, failing case first, run focused spec before the suite) plus concrete file pointers (`web/docs/test.md`, `packages/dify-ui/README.md`); not a 5 because the steps are heuristics rather than copy-paste-ready commands. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Five clearly sequenced numbered steps with an embedded checkpoint ('Run the focused spec before the affected suite and relevant static checks') and a closing risk report; not a 5 because there is no explicit failure-feedback loop (e.g., what to do when the failing case does not fail). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A short overview that cleanly defers policy and commands to one-level-deep, clearly signaled references (`web/docs/test.md`, the README Development section) with no nesting — well-organized and easy to navigate. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |