Content
78%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 read-only diagnostic skill: lean overview, correct one-level-deep reference routing, real executable commands in the bundle, and strong safety gates around evidence confidence and authorization. The main gaps are repeated authorization language, a vague MCP Tools section, and no explicit validate-before-concluding checkpoint in the workflow.
Suggestions
Conciseness: state the authorization rule once (in Host Capability Gate) and reference it from the Workflow and Error Handling sections instead of restating it in step 5, the post-workflow paragraph, and the mutation table row.
Actionability: replace 'Use a fitting host-advertised Azure read or the references' read-only queries' in MCP Tools with the specific commands the references rely on (e.g., kubectl describe pod, az aks nodepool show --query gpuProfile) or name the exact host-read schemas that qualify.
Workflow clarity: add an explicit verification checkpoint before the final report step, e.g., 'Before concluding, confirm each hypothesis is supported by quoted evidence; otherwise mark it unconfirmed' — creating a validate-then-report feedback loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~60-line body assumes AKS/kubectl competence and explains no background concepts, but the authorization caveat ('Require explicit authorization before scaling, cordon/drain, deletion...') is restated across the Host Capability Gate, workflow step 5, the post-workflow paragraph, and the Error Handling table — minor trimmable redundancy that keeps it below the lean anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete evidence is named (exporter on port 19400, incident-window FB_USED/FB_FREE, gpuProfile, OOMKilled correlation with container limits) and executable commands sit one level deep in the references, matching 'mostly executable guidance'. It falls short of anchor 5 because 'Use a fitting host-advertised Azure read or the references' read-only queries' (MCP Tools) is vague and early steps like 'Bind subscription, cluster, kube context, pool' state what but not how. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Six clearly sequenced steps with checkpoints present ('state which reads ran', 'Report evidence, confidence, missing evidence, and owner handoff') plus an Error Handling table mapping failure conditions to responses. Not anchor 5 because the diagnostic steps lack an explicit validate-before-conclude feedback loop; the destructive-operation cap does not apply since the skill is read-only and mutations are explicitly deferred to authorization. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview whose workflow step 3 routes to four labeled references (scheduling, observability, KAITO, scaling); all four exist in references/, are one level deep, hold the executable commands and detail tables, and link only to external docs with no further skill-file nesting — a clear match to the well-signaled one-level-deep anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |