Content
78%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 tight, well-structured delegation skill that appropriately defers to the MCP server as the source of truth. Its main weakness is actionability: it describes the approach but gives no concrete tool examples or call patterns.
Suggestions
Add 1-2 concrete examples of a format-creation tool call (or at least name representative tool names from the MCP server) so Claude has a starting point before exploring schemas.
Add a final workflow step to verify the item was created (e.g., confirm the returned item ID/link), giving the workflow a lightweight validation checkpoint.
Consider a short 'Common formats' mapping (e.g., kanban → board tool, doc → document tool) to reduce first-call discovery effort.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient with no padding; it does not re-explain what Miro or MCP is and every line earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | The 3-step workflow is concrete (identify format+content, handle space/folder, pick tool and call per schema) but offers no tool names or call examples — key execution detail is deferred entirely to the MCP server. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear, sequenced 3-step workflow with an 'Ask if unclear' clarification checkpoint; creation is non-destructive so no hard validation cap, though a confirm-item-created step would strengthen it. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no need for external references, organized into clean intro, Workflow, and 'When not to use' sections — meeting the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |