Content
70%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is well organized and gives clear, concrete column-selection guidance for a simple task. Its main weaknesses are redundant Purpose/Usage prose and the lack of a complete rendered table example to anchor the output.
Suggestions
Collapse the Purpose and Usage sections into a single concise statement to remove the redundant restating of the description.
Add one full example of the rendered markdown table (with header and a couple of rows) so the expected output is concrete and copy-paste ready.
Mention issues/PRs and common query fields explicitly in the description or body to broaden natural trigger coverage.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The Purpose and Usage sections largely restate each other and the frontmatter description (e.g., "allowing users to quickly grasp... without having to parse through raw data" vs. "easier to users to review and analyze... at a glance"), so the body could be tightened; it does not, however, explain concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete field-selection rules and a usable link-format example ("[#123](https://github.com/owner/repo/issues/123)"), but it stops short of a complete rendered example table, leaving the actual output underspecified. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | This is a simple single-task skill and the action is unambiguous — choose columns based on the query, always include the number+title as a markdown link — which the simple-skills scoring note permits to score 3 without an explicit multi-step workflow. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is under 50 lines, has no bundle files and no need for external references, and is organized into clear sections (Purpose, Usage, How to Render), satisfying the simple-skills exception for progressive disclosure. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |