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.
A dense, well-organized body that communicates repo-specific rules with almost no waste and pairs them with concrete verification steps. The only meaningful gap is the absence of a copy-paste example for the core task (adding a RETENTION_POLICIES entry) and an exact test command.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~30-line body explains nothing Claude already knows and every line carries project-specific facts ("Expired `authSessions` and `authRefreshTokens` are pruned by `convex/retention.ts`"), matching anchor 5 — lean with every token earning its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete file paths (`convex/lib/retentionPolicy.ts`), API patterns (`.withIndex()`, `.take(...)`), constants (`RETENTION_STANDARD_BATCH_SIZE`), and runnable commands (`bunx convex codegen`, `bunx convex dev --once --typecheck=disable`) provide mostly executable guidance, but there is no example policy entry and no exact Vitest command, matching anchor 4 rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The dedicated Verification section supplies explicit checkpoints (focused tests, codegen, real runtime check) so the destructive/batch cap does not apply, but the Checklist-to-Verification flow has no explicit ordering or error-recovery loop, matching anchor 4 (most checkpoints present, minor validation gaps). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, has no bundle files, and contains no content that belongs in separate files; the Overview/Checklist/Verification sections are well-organized, so per the rubric's simple-skill guidance it fits anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |