Content
88%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.
An exemplary maintainer-guide body: precise, actionable, and sequenced with real validation checkpoints. The only refinements are trimming the duplicated warnings and potentially moving per-layer file touch lists into reference files.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and imperative, driven by exact file paths and invariants with no padding or explanation of known concepts. Minor duplication ('Do NOT install this on production Paperclip agents' appears twice, and 'Developer/maintainer skill' is repeated) keeps it just below the leanest anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable guidance throughout: exact per-layer file touch lists, copy-paste vitest and git commands, a concrete idempotency-key format ('<kind>:<issueId>:<decisionKey>:<revisionId>'), and a specific troubleshooting note for the 'act is not a function' failure. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | An explicit 'Order of operations' section with rationale, five clearly numbered layers, a dedicated pre-review test section with runnable commands, a pre-merge checklist, and error-recovery guidance — validation checkpoints are explicit and well placed. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-sectioned single-file skill with no bundle files, so all in-repo pointers (e.g. skills/paperclip/references/api-reference.md, PR #7649) resolve to real targets. The ~275-line per-layer touch lists could be split into references/ files, which places it at 'good structure; minor organization gaps' rather than the ideal split. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |