Content
75%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 highly actionable, repo-specific guide with complete code skeletons, exact file paths, and a useful end-to-end checklist. Its main weaknesses are restating general keyboard/ARIA accessibility knowledge Claude already has (§6–§7) and lacking explicit runtime verification steps or any content split into reference files.
Suggestions
Trim §6 and §7 to requirement-only bullets (or move them to a reference file), keeping only the VS Code-specific details (focusBorder theme, aria-setsize/aria-posinset for virtualized lists) and cutting general WAI-ARIA knowledge.
Add an explicit validation step to the workflow, e.g. "Launch VS Code, focus the feature, invoke the accessibility help keybinding, and confirm the dialog opens with correct keybindings".
Consider moving the full example skeletons (especially the alternative IAccessibleViewContentProvider pattern) into a references/ file and keeping a one-line pointer plus the minimal pattern in SKILL.md.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Sections 1–5 are lean and repo-specific (exact enum entries, file paths, registration calls), but §6 ("Tab order: All interactive elements must be reachable via Tab / Shift+Tab", "Focus trapping: Modal dialogs must trap focus") and §7 ("must declare the correct ARIA role (e.g., role=\"button\")", "Avoid generic labels like 'button' or 'icon'") restate standard WAI-ARIA knowledge Claude already has, and §1 carries a second full alternative skeleton. Mostly efficient but could be tightened — not the pervasive padding of a 2, but more than the minor trimming of a 4. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides a copy-paste-ready TypeScript skeleton with correct import paths, `AccessibleViewRegistry.register(...)` calls, enum and configuration registration snippets with `...baseVerbosityProperty`, `playSignal` usage, `<keybinding:commandId>` syntax, and an exact Key Files listing. The alternative provider pattern is a justified sketch explicitly backed by a pointer to a real codebase example. This matches the fully-executable top anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | §1–§3 give clearly numbered steps (create implementation → content provider → onClose → register), the When-to-Use section gives an explicit decision rule (accessible view only for rich/visual content), and the closing checklist validates every section. However, there is no runtime verification step (e.g. launch VS Code, focus the feature, invoke the help dialog) and no error-recovery feedback loop, so it sits at 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps' rather than the 5 anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent), so this is a single-file skill; it is well structured with numbered sections, in-text navigation ("Sections 4–7 below… apply more broadly to any UI change"), a checklist, and a clearly signaled cross-skill reference. Some bulk (the dual skeletons in §1, the §6 prose on unavailable options) could live in a reference file, keeping it below the well-signaled one-level-deep references of the 5 anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |