Content
56%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 tool-workflow core is excellent and genuinely beyond Claude's prior knowledge, but roughly half the body is general clinical/MCQ knowledge Claude already knows, and nothing is split into reference files despite the volume. Trimming the off-purpose sections and externalizing the tool reference would lift both conciseness and progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
Remove or externalize the Clinical MCQ Reasoning Framework, Diagnostic Test Selection, and Lab Interpretation sections: they restate general medical knowledge and are off-purpose for a guideline-retrieval skill.
Move the full Tool Workflow tables and Evidence Grading reference into a separate REFERENCES.md, keeping SKILL.md a concise overview with one-level-deep pointers.
Add a concrete runnable Python example under 'COMPUTE, DON'T DESCRIBE' so the analysis directive is executable rather than aspirational.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Noticeably verbose: large sections restate general clinical knowledge Claude already knows (Diagnostic Test Selection, Lab Interpretation with SnNOut/SpPIn, Surgical Decision Making, and the ~60-line Clinical MCQ Reasoning Framework including TLICS and Holliday-Segar), which is off-purpose padding for a guideline-retrieval skill. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | Highly concrete tool guidance with exact parameter names and gotchas (e.g., 'SIGN_search_guidelines(query NOT q)', 'MAGICapp returns dict: use r.get(data, [])', 'NCCN_get_patient_guideline(url) takes full URL not integer ID'); minor gap is the absence of any runnable code example despite the 'COMPUTE, DON'T DESCRIBE' directive. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The search strategy is clearly sequenced (start narrow, broaden, query >=3 sources, retrieve full text) with a fallback ladder and checkpoints like 'Always check publication date' and 'verify the original source'; this is a read-only skill so the destructive-operation validation cap does not apply. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good in-file header and table structure, but the skill is a 303-line monolith with zero references to separate files; content that clearly belongs in reference files (the full tool table, the MCQ reasoning framework) is inlined rather than split out. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |