Content
78%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 well-structured overview body: clear when-to-use/not-to-use boundaries, strong anti-patterns with BAD/GOOD examples, an explicit approval checkpoint, and mandated build validation. Full command detail is appropriately delegated to real, well-signaled reference files; the remaining gaps are minor — a redundant trigger-phrases section and an implicit retry loop.
Suggestions
Drop or merge the "Trigger phrases" section — it duplicates the frontmatter description's use-when clause and adds token cost without new guidance.
Make the build-failure feedback loop explicit in the workflow (e.g., "if build/test fails, fix on the stacked branch and re-run before proceeding") to reach full checkpoint coverage.
Consider inlining the two core cherry-pick commands for stack creation (checkout -b + cherry-pick) so the body is executable without loading the reference.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean — Mindset frames skill-specific failure modes ("The monolith", "The over-split", "2–4 PRs sweet spot") rather than generic knowledge — but the "Trigger phrases" section duplicates the description's use-when clause and Mindset could be trimmed a line or two. Not 5: minor over-explanation; not 3: no padding of concepts Claude already knows. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete executable commands are present (git log/diff-tree, build verification with "npm run build && npm test", BAD/GOOD branch-name examples), and the full cherry-pick sequence is offloaded to the real, copy-paste-ready references/workflow-steps.md. Not 5: the body itself reduces the stack-creation steps to a one-line arrow summary, so execution depends on the reference. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequence — "analyse → group → propose (table, wait for approval) → name → stack (cherry-pick) → describe (What/Why) → remind about target branches" — with an explicit user-approval checkpoint and build verification mandated before reporting success, satisfying validation for this batch/destructive git workflow. Not 5: the fix-and-retry feedback loop if the build fails is implied rather than explicit. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Three one-level-deep references (workflow-steps.md, anti-patterns.md, worked-example.md — all verified to exist), each listed with a purpose and a load-condition ("load when executing a decomposition", "load when explaining a failure mode", "load when verifying output format"). The body stays at overview size; navigation is easy with no nesting. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |