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.
The body is highly actionable with copy-paste-ready CLI commands and a well-structured connection workflow including state-driven feedback loops. Minor conciseness redundancy and a small workflow numbering inconsistency prevent a top score.
Suggestions
Remove the duplicated `membrane action list --intent=QUERY` command from 'Popular actions' or merge that section into 'Searching for actions' to avoid redundancy.
Fix the workflow numbering: label a clear 'Step 2' (e.g. searching/running actions) and reconcile the '1b' heading with a '1a', or drop the numbered-suffix scheme.
Tighten or relocate the introductory 'Finastra is a large financial technology company...' paragraph, which explains a vendor Claude can look up rather than skill-specific guidance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean with concrete commands, flags, and a table, but has minor over-explanation: the opening 'Finastra is a large financial technology company...' paragraph and a duplicated action-list command in both 'Searching for actions' and 'Popular actions'. It is more efficient than anchor 3 but not perfectly lean. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Commands are fully executable and copy-paste ready across the common cases — install, login (interactive and headless), connection ensure/get, action list/run, and proxy requests — with flag tables and JSON input examples, matching anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The connection workflow has a clear sequence with explicit state checks (READY/BUILDING/CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED) and a feedback loop (poll again after the user acts), but the numbering is inconsistent ('1b', 'Step 2' with no labeled Step 2) and action execution lacks result validation, keeping it below anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-organized into clearly-headed sections with no deep nesting and no bundle files to misreference; all content is appropriately inline for this skill. It falls short of anchor 5 only because nothing is split out into one-level-deep reference files, which is acceptable here but not exemplary. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |