Content
81%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.
An unusually actionable, well-sequenced skill: executable commands, a complete artifact template, explicit validation checkpoints, and error-recovery guidance. Its main weakness is token efficiency — the snapshot-mode disambiguation and the checklist/failures overlap repeat the same information multiple times across ~470 lines.
Suggestions
State the snapshot-mode disambiguation once (in 'How the mode arg is read') and have Step 1 and the Validation Checklist reference it by anchor link instead of restating the rule.
Merge the Common Failures table into the Validation Checklist (or move it to a reference file) — roughly half its rows restate checklist items nearly verbatim.
Consider moving the Extended-tier 'Include when' commentary out of the inline template into a reference file, keeping only the trigger conditions inline, to shorten the monolithic body.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~470-line body stays on skill-specific contracts with no generic padding, but the snapshot-mode disambiguation is stated three times (dedicated section, 'Resolve it before anything else', and again in Step 1), and the Validation Checklist and Common Failures tables restate the same failures. This is more than the 'minor instances' of the anchor above, so it sits at the mostly-efficient-could-be-tightened anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable guidance throughout: a runnable bash block for path/version resolution, a concrete checks.yaml example with real values ('curl -s -o /dev/null -w %{http_code} localhost:3000/me...'), a complete ready-to-fill plan template, and numbered authoring rules tied to specific validation rules. The placeholders are the deliberate artifact template, not pseudocode. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Four clearly ordered steps with an explicit validation checkpoint ('After writing, verify against the checklist... If any item fails, fix the offending file(s) immediately'), a full post-write validation checklist, and a Common Failures table that serves as error-recovery feedback ('create rows but no Existing Code Survey → Run the reuse searches, add the section'). This matches the top anchor: explicit validation, feedback loops, and checklists. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist; the body is one well-sectioned document (Prerequisites / Procedure / Template / Validation Checklist / Common Failures) with clearly signaled, one-level-deep cross-skill references (e.g. phase-4-testing.md#executable-checks-loop). Good structure with minor gaps: the Extended-tier template commentary and duplicated failure guidance are long enough that a separate reference file would ease navigation, keeping it below the top anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |