Content
77%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.
A tight, highly actionable orchestration skill with an exemplary scored workflow including feedback loops and honest-coverage checkpoints. Its main weakness is redundancy — the Rules section largely restates the Workflow steps, costing roughly a third of the body's tokens without adding new instruction.
Suggestions
Merge the Rules section into the Workflow steps it restates (dedup rule→step 3, scoring rule→step 4, fix-plan rule→step 5, re-run rule→step 6, coverage rule→step 7), keeping only the genuinely new rules ('Compose, don't re-implement' and the dispatch-gating rule).
Drop rhetorical flourishes like "is theater" and "not a vibe" — the constraints they encode are already stated imperatively elsewhere.
Add a compact example report block (header with ran/skipped passes, three severity groups, one deduped finding) to close the actionability gap on output format.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and free of concept explanations Claude already knows, but the Rules section substantially duplicates the Workflow: rule 3 restates step 3's normalization/dedup nearly verbatim, rule 2 restates step 4's scoring rules, rule 4 restates step 5's fix plan, rule 5 restates step 6's re-run/delta, and rule 6 restates step 7's coverage honesty. Rhetorical flourishes ("not a vibe", "is theater", "a skipped pass is not a pass") add tokens; this fits the 3 anchor ("mostly efficient but could be tightened") better than 4's "minor instances". | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is concrete: named capabilities to invoke (convex-authz, convex-reviewer, convex-advisor, convex-insights, deploy-guard, migrate-rehearse, suggest), an exact scoring formula ("start at 100; subtract per CONFIRMED finding by severity (high −15, med −5, low −1), floor at 0"), specific finding classes, and an identity normalization example ("messages:list"). It falls short of the 5 anchor because no example report snippet or bus-finding invocation syntax is shown — a reader must infer the exact output format; minor gaps consistent with the 4 anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Seven clearly sequenced steps with explicit checkpoints and feedback loops: skipped/errored passes must be stated as coverage gaps ("a skipped pass is not a pass"), the score formula is printed for reproducibility, dedup is verified against double-counting, and step 6 closes the loop with "After fixes, RE-RUN the affected passes and show the score delta". This matches the 5 anchor (explicit validation steps, feedback loops, error-recovery guidance) rather than 4's "minor validation gaps". | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is 36 lines of well-organized sections (Workflow, Rules) with no bundle files provided and no content that needs splitting; per the rubric's simple-skill guideline, under-50-line skills with no need for external references score 5 with well-organized sections. The few file references (specs/finding.schema.json, specs/finding-report.schema.json) are one level deep and clearly signaled as part of the parent project, not buried. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |