Content
86%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 highly actionable with concrete executable commands and a well-sequenced workflow that includes a real validation step, with only minor editorial padding and an implicit rather than explicit error-recovery loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean and operational, assuming Claude knows what Convex and backups are, but retains some editorial framing ('a hope, not a backup', 'the half almost nobody does — this is the point') that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready commands with clearly marked placeholders (e.g. 'npx convex export --path backup-<date>.zip', 'npx convex import backup-<date>.zip --deployment restore-drill-<date> --replace') and names the MCP tools for verification, covering the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear six-step sequence with an explicit validation checkpoint (4d ASSERT recovery, 0-rows = FAILED drill), but it lacks an explicit fix-and-retry feedback loop for when the assert fails, which the top anchor requires. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no need for external references, organized into clear ## Workflow and ## Rules sections — meeting the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |