Content
56%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 core commit workflow is excellent — concrete commands, explicit prompts, extensive validation, and error-recovery loops — but the skill is packaged as a 24KB monolith with substantial duplicated instruction across its mode-handling sections. Consolidating the repeated task-bound and skill-context rules into one place (or into a reference file) would cut significant tokens without losing capability.
Suggestions
State the skill-context precedence rules once and reference them: the 'Shared project skill-context' section and the 'How to apply skill-context rules' block cover the same ground; merge them into a single short paragraph plus the conflict-priority rule.
Extract the /aif-implement task-bound and classic-group contracts (Step 3's mode descriptions plus their repetition in Behavior steps 6-9 and 'Important') into a references/task-bound-mode.md file, leaving SKILL.md with a one-line pointer and the ordinary-mode flow.
Define what 'prove ownership' and 'map changes at hunk level' concretely mean (e.g., the exact git apply --cached patch-per-group sequence or a decision checklist), turning the two remaining judgment-shaped steps into executable ones.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~400-line body is noticeably verbose for a commit-message skill: the skill-context precedence rules are stated twice in full (the 'Shared project skill-context' section and again under 'How to apply skill-context rules'), the classic-group task-bound contract is spelled out three times (Step 3, Behavior steps 6-9, and 'Important'), and it explains concepts Claude already knows (nested-CLAUDE.md precedence principles, why a spec exists). This fits 'noticeably verbose; several unnecessary explanations or padded sections'; a 3 would require the content to be mostly efficient with only incidental trimming opportunities, but the repetition here is structural. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is highly executable: exact commands (`git diff --cached`, `git add -p`, `git apply --cached`, `git status --porcelain -uall`), concrete glob patterns for plan lookup, fully specified AskUserQuestion prompts with options, and three complete commit-message examples. It falls short of 5 because some steps remain judgment-shaped rather than executable — 'inspect each candidate's content and prove its ownership' and 'map changes at hunk level' describe outcomes without the procedure to reach them. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 10-step workflow is clearly sequenced with strong validation checkpoints (verify the staged diff equals the captured group set, stop-before-staging ambiguity gates, post-commit diff equality checks) and a genuine feedback loop for failed hooks (inspect HEAD/index, re-analyze, re-confirm). Validation is present, so the destructive/batch cap does not apply. It misses 5 because the ordinary vs. task-bound vs. classic-group mode logic is interleaved across three different sections rather than one coherent path, leaving minor gaps in which rules apply when. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | There are no bundle files at all, so all content lives in this single SKILL.md, and clearly separable material — the /aif-implement task-bound integration contract, plan-resolution glob rules, and the skill-context precedence policy — is inlined rather than split into reference files. Section headers do provide real structure and the .ai-factory file reads are clearly signaled, matching 'some structure but could be better organized; content that should be separate is inline' rather than the minimal-structure anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |