Content
82%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, actionable skill body: concrete before/after examples, explicit principles that add non-obvious guidance, and a workflow with real validation steps. The only real weaknesses are the redundant Refinement Process vs Workflow sections and the absence of an explicit error-recovery loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is efficient and assumes competence — principles are non-obvious guidance (project standards, avoid nested ternaries, don't over-simplify) rather than explanations of basics. The main trim candidate is the overlap between "Refinement Process" (5 steps) and "Workflow" (7 steps), which largely restate each other. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Three complete, executable before/after examples in Go and TypeScript cover the common cases (nesting, nested ternaries, consolidation), and the workflow names concrete commands (git status/diff, make check-style-fix). Not anchor 4 because there are no gaps — the examples are copy-paste ready and directly demonstrate the principles. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 7-step Workflow is clearly sequenced with validation checkpoints (run linter, run tests to confirm functionality preserved). It stops short of anchor 5 because there is no explicit error-recovery feedback loop (e.g. what to do when the linter or tests fail after refinement). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist; all content lives in a single file with clear section headers, and nothing here clearly belongs in a separate reference. It is not anchor 5 because the duplicated Refinement Process/Workflow sections are a minor organization gap, and the file runs ~175 lines rather than being a compact overview. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |