Content
63%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-sequenced, token-efficient process guide with concrete tool directives, but it leans on a REFERENCE.md that is absent from the bundle, leaving the dependency-category taxonomy and the RFC issue template undefined. Fixing the dangling reference would raise both actionability and progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
Ship the referenced REFERENCE.md (or inline the four dependency categories and the GitHub issue RFC template) — the body delegates critical specifics to it three times, but the file does not exist in the bundle.
Add an explicit validation checkpoint after 'gh issue create' (confirm the issue URL is live and the body renders) with a recovery step if creation fails.
Trim or compress the Ousterhout deep-module definition to just the vocabulary the skill uses (small interface hiding a large implementation) since it restates a concept Claude already knows.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — terse friction questions, compact sub-agent briefs, and purposeful lines like 'The friction you encounter IS the signal'. The one-sentence Ousterhout deep-module definition restates a concept Claude largely knows and could be trimmed, so it sits just below the 'every token earns its place' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete steps exist ('subagent_type=Explore', 'Spawn 3+ sub-agents', per-agent constraint prompts, 'gh issue create'), but the four dependency categories and the GitHub issue template are delegated to REFERENCE.md, which does not exist anywhere in the bundle — key details are missing rather than merely incomplete. Not a 4: the guidance is not executable end-to-end because two critical specifics are dangling. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 7-step sequence with explicit user decision points (steps 3 and 6) and an explicit instruction to create the issue without re-asking. Minor validation gaps — no checkpoint that the issue was created successfully or how to recover from a failed 'gh issue create' — keep it below the 5 anchor's explicit feedback loops. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are one level deep and clearly signaled ('See [REFERENCE.md](REFERENCE.md)'), but the bundle contains no reference files at all — the referenced file is missing, so navigation breaks exactly where the detail is needed. This lands at 'some structure but could be better organized' rather than the 4/5 anchors whose references actually resolve. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |