Content
88%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 a highly actionable, well-sequenced detection procedure with explicit validation checkpoints, error-recovery loops, and a complete decision tree. Its only weaknesses are moderate token redundancy — chiefly the six-fold repetition of the blocking-question boilerplate — and a dense inline footprint that leaves little separation between overview and operational detail.
Suggestions
Define the blocking-question pattern once (e.g. a short "D5 pattern" spec near the top) and reference it at each decision point instead of repeating the full "Call your structured question tool now ... STOP. Do not write the question as text" block six times.
Condense section 4 to the non-obvious entrypoint patterns and known framework defaults, since conventions like Go's `main.go`/`cmd/*/main.go` or Flutter's `lib/main.dart` are knowledge Claude already has.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is table-driven and free of concept explanations Claude already knows, so it is more efficient than anchor 3's "some unnecessary explanation". It falls short of a 5 because the "D5 -- BLOCKING ... STOP. Do not write the question as text." boilerplate is repeated six times and section 4 enumerates well-known entrypoint conventions (e.g. `main.go`, `cmd/*/main.go`, `lib/main.dart`) that could be trimmed or condensed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully executable: exact indicator filenames and lockfile mappings, a copy-paste search string ("launchdarkly, ldclient, ld-client, LDClient, @launchdarkly, launchdarkly-"), fully specified question texts with selectable options, and concrete defaults for demo-app creation ("Node.js + Express or a static HTML page are good defaults"). This matches anchor 5's copy-paste-ready coverage of common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Sections 1–6 are clearly sequenced, with the 5a workspace-confidence classification acting as an explicit validation checkpoint and explicit recovery loops ("re-run detection (sections 1-4) scoped to that folder"). The terminal decision tree maps every branch — no app, unclear, SDK installed/not initialized/not present, dual-SDK, language not detected — to a concrete next step, matching anchor 5's explicit validation with feedback loops. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | References to sibling skills and bundle files (../plan/SKILL.md, ../apply/SKILL.md, ../../references/sdk/recipes.md) are one level deep and clearly signaled with purpose, and the inline indicator/entrypoint tables are operational checklists needed on every run so inline placement is appropriate. It is not a 5 because the repeated blocking-question blocks add inline density that a shared pattern definition or reference file could absorb, and no bundle files exist under this skill to organize that bulk. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |