Content
88%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 high-quality, highly actionable body with a clear diagnostic-to-deliverable workflow, explicit tests and defaults for expert disagreements, and a concrete output template. The main gap is content duplication with the reference files rather than a strict overview-plus-references split.
Suggestions
Remove the 'Receipts' section from SKILL.md and point to references/quotes.md instead — the same quotes (with timestamps) already live there, so the body currently pays for them twice.
Slim the per-play step detail that duplicates references/frameworks.md (e.g., the full five-step canvas walkthrough) into a short summary plus a pointer, keeping only the routing table and one worked example per play inline.
Consider adding a one-line note under 'Go deeper' on when to open quotes.md (e.g., to cite a guest verbatim in the deliverable) so the reference's purpose is discoverable at decision time.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and assumes competence — no concept padding, tables used effectively — but the 'Receipts' quotes duplicate content already in references/quotes.md, and play details overlap references/frameworks.md, so a meaningful amount could be trimmed or moved. Efficient with minor instances of removable content rather than over-explanation. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable instruction-only guidance: exact diagnostic questions to ask, step-by-step play procedures with worked examples (LevelJump so-what ladder, Square Stand H1), a copy-paste-ready markdown deliverable template, and a 1/3/5 grading rubric with a specified output format. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear Step 1 (diagnose, capped at 4 questions) → Step 2 (routing table) → Step 3 (run the play) sequence with explicit validation checkpoints: a 'Done when' criterion, the Bar Test and swappable test, category readiness factors, prospect testing with lean-in logging, and abandon-if-not-adopted feedback loops. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Two real, one-level-deep references (references/frameworks.md, references/quotes.md — both verified present) are clearly signaled under 'Go deeper' with descriptions. However, the body is more than an overview: play detail overlaps frameworks.md and the receipts section duplicates quotes.md, so the split is not fully clean. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |