Content
36%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 a lightweight catalogue stub that advertises the skill and points off-site rather than providing the actual workflow, code, or references, leaving it short but thin on actionable guidance and sequence.
Suggestions
Inline a minimal concrete workflow (e.g. a sample DESIGN.md template or a create/update command sequence) so the skill is usable without fetching the upstream bundle.
Replace the non-executable `open https://...` with actual shell commands (e.g. `git clone`, install path, invocation command) for actionability.
Add explicit numbered steps with at least a basic verification checkpoint so the install-and-invoke sequence is unambiguous.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is short and mostly unpadded, but it restates the frontmatter description, repeats the upstream URL, and spends lines explaining catalogue mechanics that add little new information, so it is mostly efficient with some slack. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is high-level: it tells the agent to inspect an upstream README and 'ask the agent to invoke' the skill, with only a single non-executable `open` command, so it gives hints but not the concrete steps to actually run the workflow. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A rough install-then-invoke sequence is present but steps are poorly defined with no commands, paths, or validation; it does not rise to anchor 3 because there are no concrete listed steps, and it does not fall to 1 because a rough order exists. | 2 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | It has clear section headers and points to one external resource (the upstream repo), but the detailed workflow lives entirely off-site with no local references, scripts, or assets, so structure exists but the substantive material is not locally disclosed. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 10 / 20 Passed |