Content
100%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 tight, well-structured analysis workflow: a sequenced process with an explicit citation-validation gate, a concrete report template, and a realistic worked example. It assumes Claude's competence and provides actionable, copy-ready structure without padding.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean instruction set with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows (no definitions of FINRA/SEC); the Output Format template and priority order each earn their tokens. The slight restatement of frameworks in the priority section adds new ordering information rather than padding, so it stays at level 3 rather than dropping to 2. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete, actionable guidance throughout: enumerated severity/confidence levels, a complete copy-paste output template, and a worked example finding citing a real rule (FINRA Rule 2111.05). For an instruction-only skill this specificity meets the level-3 bar; it is not merely abstract direction (which would be level 2) because the steps and template are directly executable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 7-step sequence with an explicit validation checkpoint — step 7 'Validate citations — Verify all cited rules exist and are current before finalizing' — providing the feedback gate the rubric requires, matching the level-3 anchor rather than the validation-gap level 2. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Self-contained, well-organized into four clear sections (Instructions, Regulatory Priority Order, Output Format, Example Finding) with no nested references and no bundle files needed; the simple single-purpose structure earns level 3 per the simple-skills scoring note rather than the monolithic level-1 or under-organized level-2. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |