Content
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill body is appropriately lean and well-structured for a single-purpose task, but its workflow lacks executable detail on message formatting and a verification loop around the commit step. Tightening those would push it to full marks.
Suggestions
Show a concrete example of the desired commit message format (e.g., `[hello] feat: <subject>`) so step 3 is copy-paste ready.
Add a verification step before committing, such as re-checking `git diff --cached` and handling an empty staging area explicitly.
Specify what 'suggest staging' should propose (e.g., `git add <files>` or `git add -A`) so the guidance is actionable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — a one-line intro plus a five-step workflow — with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, so every token earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete commands appear (`git status`, `git diff --cached`, `git commit`), but step 3 only says to "Generate a commit message with a [hello] prefix" without an example format, and "suggest staging" is vague, leaving guidance incomplete. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are sequenced and a confirmation checkpoint exists, but the workflow performs a write operation (`git commit`) with no verification/feedback loop (e.g., confirm staged content, handle a failed commit), which caps clarity at 2 per the destructive-operations guideline. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a simple under-50-line skill with no need for external references, and its two clearly-organized sections (intro + Workflow) satisfy the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |