Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a lean, well-sequenced workflow with good progressive disclosure and a real fix-retry loop, but its actionability is capped because the actual fix tool commands live entirely in the external doc rather than in the skill body.
Suggestions
Inline the minimal clang-format / clang-tidy invocation commands (or a one-line example of each) in Step 2 so the skill is copy-paste actionable without opening coding_style.md.
State concretely how "all checks pass" is verified (e.g., the exact check command(s) to re-run) rather than only describing the loop condition.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~25-line body is lean with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line (git diff, merge-base, CMake target mapping) earns its place and assumes competence. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Step 1 gives a concrete executable command (`git diff --name-only <ref_commit> | grep -v '^thirdparty' | tee /tmp/changed_files.txt`), but the core fix commands (clang-format/clang-tidy invocation) are deferred to the external coding_style.md rather than given in-body, leaving key details missing. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear two-step sequence with pre-flight user confirmation checkpoints and an explicit feedback loop ("Repeat the full cycle until all checks pass") satisfies the clear-sequence-with-validation anchor; it is not score 2 because an explicit repeat-until-pass checkpoint is present. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a simple under-50-line skill, the concise overview plus a single clearly-signaled one-level-deep reference ([coding_style.md](../../../docs/dev/coding_style.md) with a strong "Read that file before proceeding" cue) is well-organized and easy to navigate. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |