Content
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A dense, highly actionable body with a clear phased workflow and concrete tool guidance. The main weakness is progressive disclosure: three of four referenced bundle files do not exist, leaving broken links and forcing detail to live inline.
Suggestions
Create the missing referenced files (DIAGNOSTIC_WORKFLOW.md, REPORT_TEMPLATE.md, CHECKLIST.md) or remove the broken references from the Reference Files section.
Move the per-phase code examples and algorithms into DIAGNOSTIC_WORKFLOW.md so SKILL.md stays a true overview, then verify each referenced path resolves to a real file.
Consider placing the Tool Parameter Corrections and Fallback Chains tables into the workflow reference file to further trim SKILL.md once the references exist.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and information-dense with no concept padding — compact tables for parameter corrections, evidence tiers, and fallback chains; every token earns its place and Claude's competence is assumed. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Fully concrete guidance with exact tool calls and parameters (e.g. `Orphanet_search_diseases(operation="search_diseases", query=keyword)`, `FAVOR_annotate_variant("chr-pos-ref-alt")`) plus a WRONG/CORRECT parameter table and numeric scoring rules. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 8-phase sequence (Phase 0–7) with key phase details, explicit fallback chains for error recovery, and evidence-grading tiers acting as validation checkpoints. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are one-level-deep and clearly signaled with descriptions, but the actual bundle structure breaks this: DIAGNOSTIC_WORKFLOW.md, REPORT_TEMPLATE.md, and CHECKLIST.md are missing (only scripts/clinical_patterns.py exists), so detail that should be offloaded remains inline. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |