Content
88%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 thorough, highly actionable 12-step migration workflow with explicit validation and error-recovery loops. The main weaknesses are minor content duplication (partial-file-include guidance appears twice) and that the referenced reference files are not present in the skill bundle, which leaves the progressive-disclosure navigation unverifiable.
Suggestions
Dedupe the partial-file-include (:start-after:/:end-before: → :snippet-start:/:snippet-end:) guidance, which is repeated in Step 7 and the Edge Cases section, into a single location.
Ensure the referenced files (references/page-scanning.md, references/data-adaptation.md, references/extension-handoff.md) actually ship in the skill bundle so the one-level-deep navigation resolves.
Tighten Step 7's infrastructure-change list, which currently re-explains each :replace:/:remove: rationale that is already covered in Step 8's numbered application steps.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and procedural with little beginner-concept padding (no "what is a test suite" exposition), but partial-file-include guidance is repeated in Step 7 and Edge Cases and a few sections could be tightened. It is not a 5 because of that duplicated content and length; not a 3 because the writing assumes Claude's competence rather than over-explaining. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable guidance throughout — a language-to-suite-directory table, named Bluehawk tags (:snippet-start:, :replace:, :uncomment:, :remove:), a copy-paste-ready reviewer subagent prompt, and a concrete RST literalinclude example for the docs update. It is not a 4 because specific examples cover the common cases with fill-in-the-blank commands rather than leaving gaps. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced Step 0–12 workflow with an explicit validation checkpoint in Step 11 (reviewer runs the test twice for idempotency plus the snip command) and a feedback loop (fix and re-launch, max 3 attempts, then stop and report). It is not a 4 because validation and error-recovery are explicit rather than merely present. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body acts as an overview and clearly signals one-level-deep references for detail (references/page-scanning.md, references/data-adaptation.md, references/extension-handoff.md, plus per-language CLAUDE.md files), but those references/*.md files are not present in the bundle, so navigation cannot be verified. It is not a 5 because the referenced reference files are absent from the bundle; not a 3 because signaling is clear and detail is split out rather than inlined. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |