Content
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A highly actionable, concisely written research workflow with clear sequencing and accuracy guardrails. The main gap is progressive disclosure: the large inline output template could be split into a referenced file so SKILL.md reads as an overview.
Suggestions
Move the brand_dna.md output template into a references/ file (e.g. references/brand_dna_template.md) and link to it from step 4 so SKILL.md serves as a lean overview.
Consider extracting the web-search query block (step 2) into references/search-queries.md, leaving the five-step process as the navigable spine.
Add a one-line pointer near the top (e.g. "See references/brand_dna_template.md for the exact file structure") so the file split is clearly signaled rather than implicit.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean throughout — it assumes Claude's competence, explains no basic concepts, and every section (crawl list, search queries, output template, rules) earns its tokens. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Copy-paste search queries (e.g. "[company name]" site:crunchbase.com OR site:ycombinator.com), an exact page list, and a complete output template give concrete, executable guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Five clearly numbered steps with extraction checklists and an accuracy guardrail ("No fabrication ... Never guess") plus 404 handling; this is a research/synthesis task, not a destructive or batch operation, so the validation cap does not apply. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into sections but effectively monolithic: a roughly 60-line output template is kept fully inline with no references or file-splitting, where moving it to a referenced file would let SKILL.md act as a leaner overview. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |