Content
86%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, well-structured review skill that delivers concrete policy guidance with excellent token efficiency and clear navigation. Adding example gh commands and an explicit verification step for grounding claims would round out actionability and workflow clarity.
Suggestions
Add 1-2 example gh commands (e.g., 'gh issue list --state open' or 'gh release list') to make the 'ground every claim in gh CLI evidence' rule directly executable.
Include a brief verification checkpoint, such as confirming each strategic claim cites a gh evidence item before signing off, to support the arbiter role.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean bullet lists with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line carries actionable guidance and assumes Claude's competence. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, specific policy guidance (named files, named reviewers, 'ground every claim in gh CLI evidence', 'one-line migration note'); it is instruction-only so code is not required, but example gh commands would make the evidence-gathering step fully executable. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clearly organized into 'When to activate' and 'Key rules' with a single, unambiguous purpose; it lacks explicit validation checkpoints for its consequential review/arbiter role, which keeps it just below a 5 but above the destructive/batch cap of 3. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, well-organized into clear sections, with one well-signaled one-level-deep reference (the APM CEO persona link); meets the simple-skill exception for top marks. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |