Content
93%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 tight, actionable, well-sequenced destructive-operation skill that correctly front-loads user confirmation and provides a copy-paste command with option variants. Its only gap is the absence of an explicit error-recovery feedback loop, which keeps workflow clarity just below the top anchor.
Suggestions
Add a brief 'if the command reports nothing was deleted or errors, check that --remote/--harness match the configured backend and retry' feedback loop to push workflow clarity to 5.
Clarify what the harness value should be for non-Cursor environments, since the example hardcodes --harness "cursor".
State explicitly that confirmation must be re-obtained in the current conversation before each --yes invocation, not just once.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean (~17 lines), assumes Claude's competence, and every sentence earns its place — context about shared project memory is load-bearing for the confirmation step, not padding. No concepts Claude already knows are re-explained. Matches anchor 5; not 4 because there are no real instances of over-explanation to trim. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides a fully copy-paste-ready command (`python3 "${CURSOR_PLUGIN_ROOT}/core/memory_cli.py" --harness "cursor" forget --remote --yes`) and concrete option flags covering remote, local, and project-memory cases. Matches anchor 5 (fully executable, specific examples cover common cases); not 4 because no gaps remain in the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequence: inform user what will be deleted → obtain confirmation → run command → report output, with an explicit confirmation checkpoint before passing --yes (satisfying the destructive-op validation requirement). Not 5 because there is no error-recovery feedback loop (validate → fix → retry) or checklist, only a report step; not 3 because the key validation checkpoint is explicitly present. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, single-purpose, no external references needed, with well-organized sections (context, command block, options, reporting). Per the rubric's simple-skkill guidance this matches anchor 5; no bundle files exist to require deeper navigation. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |