Content
82%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 highly actionable, with concrete scoring mechanics and ready-to-fill output templates across three modes, plus strong sequencing and clean self-contained structure. Conciseness is good with minor trimming opportunities, and a few explicit validation checkpoints could be added for the downstream commit/dismiss actions.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is efficient and largely assumes Claude's competence — the scoring table, formula, and filled-in output templates earn their tokens — with only minor over-explanation in the Core principles section that could be tightened, fitting the 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides an executable scoring formula, a dimension table with concrete evidence sources, forcing questions, and three usage modes with copy-ready output templates populated with example values (e.g. '12 requests', '~15% retention', '4h AI-assisted'), fully actionable per the instruction-skill guidance. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Each usage mode is clearly sequenced with numbered steps, and the forcing questions (notably #5 'What would change your mind?') act as validation checkpoints; the destructive/batch cap does not strictly apply since output is recommendations, but a couple of explicit verify-before-acting checkpoints for dismiss/commit actions are missing. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A self-contained methodology with well-organized sections (Core principles, Forcing questions, Scoring framework, Usage modes A/B/C, Integration, Anti-patterns) and one-level, clearly signaled references to other skills (decision-capture); no nested or buried references, with only minor organization gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |