Content
71%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 a well-structured decision framework with genuinely concrete algorithm and stack recommendations, a clear sequenced workflow ending in an explicit validation checkpoint, and exemplary progressive disclosure into three real one-level-deep references. Its main cost is token efficiency: the same decision lists are repeated across Core Workflow, Algorithm Defaults, and Output Expectations, and the Representative Prompts section duplicates the description's triggers.
Suggestions
Merge Core Workflow steps 4–6 with the Algorithm Defaults section into a single structure → algorithm → routing mapping; the same five layout families and three routing styles are currently listed twice in nearly the same words.
Deduplicate the mobile and operational-workspace criteria, which appear almost verbatim in step 8 of the Core Workflow and again in Output Expectations — state each once and cross-reference the two foundation docs.
Drop or trim the Representative Prompts section to two or three exemplars (or remove it entirely), since the frontmatter description already encodes the full trigger set; the recovered tokens could instead hold one small executable sample (e.g., a minimal Graphviz dot or ELK layout JSON) to close the actionability gap.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body assumes Claude's intelligence (it names Sugiyama, Reingold-Tilford, Buchheim, stress majorization without explaining basics) and contains no padded prose, but it is structurally redundant: Core Workflow steps 4–6 restate the same five layout families and three routing styles that fill the Algorithm Defaults section, and the mobile/operational-workspace criteria appear nearly verbatim in both step 8 and Output Expectations. The eight-item Representative Prompts section adds further tokens that duplicate the description's triggers. This fits 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than the leaner anchor 4. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | As an instruction-only skill, absence of code is not penalized, and the guidance is highly concrete: named algorithms per graph family ('Prefer Reingold-Tilford style tidy trees and Buchheim's linear-time refinement', 'layered layout derived from Sugiyama' broken into its five pipeline stages), and a stack table assigning each tool a role (Graphviz dot/neato/fdp/sfdp/twopi/circo, ELK Layered, React Flow plus ELK or Dagre, Cytoscape.js). It stops short of anchor 5 because there are no executable artifacts — no sample dot/ELK configuration snippet or worked example a user could run or copy. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Core Workflow is a coherent 8-step sequence (classify structure → identify reading task → record constraints → choose layout family → choose routing → overlap/label/packing → stability → validate) and step 8 is an explicit validation checkpoint with a readability-criteria checklist, plus fallback guidance ('falls back to scrolling, filtering, or faceting'). It misses anchor 5 only on the feedback loop: there is no explicit 'if validation fails, revisit layout-family choice or apply the fallback' recovery path, though Output Expectations partially covers fallbacks. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The ~150-line body is an overview that appropriately pushes algorithm detail and literature into three real, well-scoped reference files, each clearly signaled in a dedicated Reference Guide section with its purpose ('Read references/algorithm-selection.md first for graph-family to algorithm-family mapping', etc.). All three referenced paths exist in the bundle, references are one level deep (they link to external sources and adjacent skills, not further nested docs), and navigation is easy — a direct match for the top anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |