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.
The body is an exemplary router skill: lean, concrete, and well-sequenced, with a scenario table that maps cleanly onto a verified bundle of per-service reference files. The only gap is the absence of an explicit post-migration verification checkpoint before completion is reported.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation checkpoint in the Steps section (e.g., after Migrate: verify the converted output builds/passes a basic smoke check before reporting 'Migration complete') to close the workflow_clarity gap.
Add a brief error-recovery loop for the assessment phase (what to do when a source service has no clear Azure mapping) so checkpoints guide recovery as well as progression.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~43-line body is a lean router: rules, a compact scenario table, output convention, and five steps — no concept explanations and no padding. Every rule (e.g., Kubernetes DNS names in HTTP clients not resolving in Container Apps) carries non-obvious information; not 4 because nothing is trimmable without losing substance. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance throughout: exact MCP tool names ('mcp_azure_mcp_get_azure_bestpractices', 'mcp_azure_mcp_documentation'), an exact output-directory convention with its definition, a per-scenario reference table with real file paths, and a copy-ready user prompt ('Migration complete. Test locally or deploy to Azure?'). Not 4 because there are no gaps for its router role — absence of inline code is appropriate since detail is delegated to reference files. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Five clearly sequenced steps with explicit gates: 'Follow phases sequentially — do not skip', assessment required before migration, 'Destructive actions require ask_user', and a progress-reporting rule with status tracking in migration-status.md. Not 5 because there is no explicit verification step (e.g., confirm migrated output compiles/passes a smoke check) before declaring 'Migration complete'; not 3 because checkpoints are explicit rather than implicit, and the workflow is non-destructive by design ('Never modify the source directory', output to a separate directory), so the missing-validation cap does not apply. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A clean overview that keeps rules and steps inline and pushes all detail to well-signaled, one-level-deep reference files organized per service (functions/app-service/container-apps), with every referenced path verified to exist in the bundle; runtime-specific detail is appropriately split into references/services/functions/runtimes/. Not 4 because navigation is easy and there are no organization gaps — the bundle structure matches the table exactly. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |