Content
82%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 highly actionable — concrete tool signatures, exact IDs, and a parameter-gotchas table — with clear sequenced workflows. Its main weakness is mild verbosity in the conceptual Reasoning Frameworks section and a long inline tool reference that could be split out for tighter progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
Trim the Reasoning Frameworks section to immunology-specific decision rules and move general concepts (innate vs adaptive timing, basic complement biology) that Claude already knows into a reference file or remove them.
Consider extracting the dense Tool Reference tables into a references/ file (e.g. tool-reference.md) and keeping only the most-used tools inline, improving progressive disclosure and token efficiency.
Add explicit validation/retry checkpoints to the Workflows (e.g. 'verify epitope hits via a second IEDB assay type before proceeding') so multi-step research paths have clear feedback loops.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The bulk is genuinely novel tool/parameter/ID knowledge (gotchas table, pathway IDs, exact accession formats) that earns its place, but the Reasoning Frameworks section restates general immunology concepts (innate vs adaptive, complement pathways) Claude largely already knows, leaving minor instances of over-explanation to trim. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Tool names, exact parameter names, literal example values ('hsa04630', 'Q9NZQ7', 'stId='), and a wrong/correct Parameter Gotchas table provide copy-paste-ready, fully executable guidance covering the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Workflows section gives clearly sequenced tool chains and the Evidence Grading section acts as a soft validation checkpoint, but explicit verify/retry feedback loops are largely implicit rather than spelled out, placing it just below the anchor-5 bar. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Single-file skill with clean, navigable section structure (LOOK UP, COMPUTE, Reasoning Frameworks, Tool Reference, Gotchas, Workflows); at ~150 lines the long inline Tool Reference could arguably live in a separate reference file, so it does not reach the anchor-5 ideal. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |