Content
63%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 an unusually precise rendering spec — exact colors, fonts, DOM hierarchy, section order, and a paired do/don't table — with a clear stepped protocol. Its two real defects are the repeated restatement of the same prohibitions (conciseness) and the fact that the entire protocol is anchored on an example.html that is not actually shipped, leaving both actionability and progressive disclosure with a broken dependency.
Suggestions
Ship the referenced example.html alongside SKILL.md (or relocate it into a references/ directory and update the path), since the source-of-truth protocol and design-system policy both hinge on a file that is currently missing from the bundle.
Consolidate the no-left-rail / no-inbox-list / no-Categories prohibitions into a single place (e.g., the implementation-constraints table) instead of restating them in the protocol, design-policy, and page-sections sections, cutting noticeable token duplication.
Add a final verification step to the protocol (e.g., a short checklist: header elements only, chrome block order, six digest sections in order, reply bar present) so the workflow has an explicit validation checkpoint against the canonical example.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with useful specifics (exact hex tokens, type stack, DOM order), but the core prohibitions are stated repeatedly: "Do not add a left rail" appears in the source-of-truth protocol, the page-sections intro ("No left rail, no inbox list"), the design-system section, and again in the implementation-constraints table ("Render a left rail..."). Anchor 3 ("mostly efficient but... could be tightened") fits: the duplication is a real tightening opportunity, keeping it below anchor 4's "minor instances of over-explanation". | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is highly concrete and executable for an instruction-only skill: exact values ("page bg: #f6f8fc", "'Google Sans', 'Roboto', -apple-system"), an exact DOM hierarchy with class names ("<header> → <main class=\"digest-wrap\"> → <div class=\"email-chrome\">"), and copy examples ("Q3 预算确认", sender "Allen Liu / Marie / Nina Park"). It misses anchor 5 because the declared canonical artifact — "Open and read the shipped `example.html` in this folder" — is not present in the bundle, so the skill's Step 1 cannot be executed as written; the in-body spec compensates but that gap is more than trivial. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear three-step sequence (read example → mirror structure 1:1 → optionally refresh mock copy) with an explicit identity guard ("Do not infer the current user's display name... use neutral wording such as `you`, `your`") and hard constraint boundaries ("If a detail is not already in `example.html`, it does not belong in your output"). This is a non-destructive rendering skill so the destructive-batch cap does not apply; it stops short of anchor 5 only because there is no explicit output-verification step (e.g., a checklist confirming the rendered page matches the example's section order). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Section headers are well organized (protocol, design-system policy, tokens, sections, pill rules, constraints table), but the skill's sole and primary reference — "the shipped `example.html` in this folder", called the canonical design and "source of truth" — does not exist in the bundle (no references/, scripts/, assets/, or example.html alongside SKILL.md). A dangling reference to the most important file anchors this at score 3 ("references present but not clearly signaled"-grade problems in navigation), well below the score-5 ideal of verified one-level-deep references. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |