Content
80%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a concise, actionable, well-structured overview of a single-purpose template skill. Its main gaps are the missing validation checkpoint in the workflow and references to bundle files that are not actually present.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation/critic checkpoint to the workflow (e.g., verify the deck renders and that every chart has a decision above it, matching the rubric referenced in example_prompt) before emitting the final artifact.
Resolve the broken file references: either vendor ./LICENSE, template.json, example.html, and assets/ into the bundle, or remove/adjust the references so signaled navigation points to real files.
Since example.html is the core executable asset and is not present, consider inlining a minimal slide HTML snippet (palette values, fonts) so the skill remains actionable even before cloning.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and well-sectioned (At a glance, Best for, Avoid for, Workflow, Output contract, Source & license) with no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete, specific guidance throughout: named files to clone (example.html), what to preserve (fonts, palette, corner brackets, paper grain), how to extend (duplicate layouts), and a copy-paste-ready <artifact> output template. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 6-step numbered sequence is present, but there are no validation/verification checkpoints or error-recovery feedback loops, which the 3-anchor requires. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The overview is well-organized, but it signals one-level-deep references (./LICENSE, template.json, example.html, assets/deck-stage.js) that are absent from the bundle, so the signaled navigation does not resolve. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |