Content
57%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 skill is strongly actionable — concrete, executable bash for every step — but undermined by sequencing incoherence (discovery after save, supersedes resolved after write), repetition of setup boilerplate, and a dangling cross-bundle reference. No validation checkpoints guard the write and chain-linking operations.
Suggestions
Fix the workflow order: move prior-design discovery and SUPERSEDES resolution (currently Steps 2-3) before the write in Step 1, so the heredoc's ${SUPERSEDES:+...} line actually populates the field, and add a post-write validation check (e.g., verify the file exists and the supersedes target resolves).
De-duplicate the SLUG/DESIGNS_DIR/BRANCH resolution block (define once, reference thereafter), state the immutability rule once, and drop the duplicated filename-format explanation — this would tighten conciseness without losing clarity.
Resolve the dangling `skills/blocks/domain-modeling.md` reference (either ship the file in references/ or remove the mention), and consider moving the document template and integration-notes sections into a reference file to reduce SKILL.md length.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | There is no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows, but the body is noticeably repetitive: the SLUG/DESIGNS_DIR/BRANCH resolution block is repeated nearly verbatim in Steps 1-4, the filename format is specified twice (Filename Format section and Step 1), and the immutability rule is stated three times (Overview, Step 1 note, Integration Notes). This fits 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened' rather than anchor 4, whose over-explanation is only minor. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is largely copy-paste executable — complete bash blocks, a full heredoc template, a concrete filename example, and a revision-chain walk loop — matching 'mostly executable guidance with minor gaps'. It misses anchor 5 because Step 1's heredoc consumes ${SUPERSEDES} before any step establishes it, so the supersedes field is not actually populated by the shown flow. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The four steps are clearly labeled with concrete commands, but the sequence is internally inconsistent: Step 2 says "Before writing a new design, search for related prior designs" yet is placed after the Step 1 write, and the supersedes linkage is computed in Step 3 only after the document has already been written in Step 1. There are also no validation checkpoints (e.g., verifying the file was written or the chain resolves). This matches 'steps listed but validation gaps; sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit'. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-sectioned with headers, but it is a ~285-line single-file monolith in which the document template, cap enforcement, and integration cross-references could live in separate reference files, and the one external path it does cite — `skills/blocks/domain-modeling.md` — does not exist in the bundle (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories are present), making it a dangling, poorly signaled reference. This fits 'some structure but could be better organized' better than anchor 4. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |