Content
100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A well-organized overview that delegates detail to a verified set of one-level-deep references, gives concrete API-level guidance via rules and a decision table, and includes a validated multi-step workflow with error-recovery feedback loops. It respects Claude's competence without concept-explaining filler.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body uses terse bullets and a compact decision table, offloads detail to references, and avoids explaining SwiftUI concepts Claude already knows; every line earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Though it contains no inline Swift code, the guidance is concrete and actionable (specific APIs like .sheet(item:), @Observable, .task(id:), a concrete rg command, and a scenario-to-wrapper table), which the rubric protects for instruction-only skills. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The "Workflow for a new SwiftUI view" is a clear 6-step sequence with explicit build-validation checkpoints and a "build fails → fix → rebuild" feedback loop, matching the validated-workflow anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview pointing to well-signaled, one-level-deep references via references/components-index.md; all referenced files exist and navigation is easy. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |