Content
67%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 well-written as an index: a tight receipt example, an executable call path, a gated three-step workflow, and honest failure semantics. Its decisive weakness is packaging, not prose — the rules/*.md files it designates as the substance of the skill are absent from the bundle, so the progressive-disclosure structure it advertises cannot actually be navigated.
Suggestions
Ship the referenced rule files (rules/provenance.md, rules/state-extraction.md, rules/receipt-mapping.md) in the bundle, or inline their essential content (threshold defaults/bands, provenance rejection criteria, state-extraction requirements) into SKILL.md — currently every workflow gate points to a file that does not exist.
Consolidate the repeated text-only rule (stated in 'Why Jev, and why text-only', the Step 1 gate, Core Principle #3, and Anti-patterns) and the repeated unobtainable/never-guess rule into one authoritative statement each to save tokens.
Add per-gate recovery guidance — e.g., when Step 0 rejects an expectation as by-construction, instruct the executor to rephrase it as a user-observable outcome and re-run — to turn the gates into a feedback loop rather than dead ends.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is a genuinely lean "thin index" — the invocation contract and command example carry real contract information with no tutorial padding about concepts Claude already knows. It is not a 5 because the text-only rule is restated roughly four times ("Jev evaluates text, not images", the Step 1 gate "no screenshot", Core Principle #3 "Jev never sees a screenshot", and Anti-pattern #1 "Feeding Jev a screenshot"), and the fail-honest rule is similarly repeated — trimmable repetition, but only minor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The concrete call path is copy-paste ready — `node ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/jev-call.mjs --expectation "the user sees an order-confirmation number" --state-file <captured-state.txt> --target <page-or-spec-id>` — and `--self-test` gives an offline verification command, with the script actually present in the bundle. It is not a 5 because the decision rules the flags depend on (threshold bands, provenance rejection criteria, state-extraction requirements) are delegated to rules files that are not in the bundle, leaving gaps an executor cannot close. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow is a clearly sequenced three-step table with an explicit Gate column per step ("Expectation is a user-observable OUTCOME, not a restatement of the state text"; "Page TEXT state captured... no screenshot"; "mapped to exactly one receipt verdict") plus a defined failure path ("When TYPESAFE_API_KEY is unset or the API is unreachable... the script emits unobtainable, never a confirms / contradicts guess"). It is not a 5 because there is no feedback loop: what the executor should do when a gate fails (e.g., rephrase a rejected expectation) is never stated. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body claims "This SKILL.md is a thin index. Detailed rules live in rules/*.md and load on demand" and links rules/provenance.md, rules/state-extraction.md, rules/receipt-mapping.md, scripts/validate-skill.mjs, evals/evals.json, and evals/triggers.jsonl — but the actual bundle contains only scripts/jev-call.mjs; none of the referenced files exist. Scored against the real bundle structure, the reference architecture is broken: every gate-owning rule file is a dangling pointer, recreating the "See advanced.md for details" anti-pattern. It is not a 3 because anchor 3's flaw (references present but not clearly signaled) is far milder than references that resolve to nothing, and not a 1 because the links are one level deep and the body does inline enough contract detail to run the happy path. | 2 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |