Content
82%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 tightly written, highly disciplined maintenance procedure: concrete commands, exact paths and ID conventions, explicit validation steps, and strong scope-control guidance. Its main gaps are the absence of an explicit ordered workflow with a fix-and-recheck loop, a few judgment steps without concrete examples, and the lack of any internal progressive disclosure for the dense convention rules.
Suggestions
Add an explicit recovery loop: state what to do when `storybook-catalog.mjs --check` or the `node --test` suite fails (fix, re-run, and when to stop), ideally as a short numbered workflow with validation checkpoints.
Give a concrete example of the judgment steps — what capturing the existing built `index.json` looks like (command or file path), and the exact form a recorded source revision should take in the PR/CI report.
Consider moving the cataloging conventions (stable meta-ID derivation, sidebar prefix rules, generated-guide ID preservation) into a single reference file so SKILL.md stays a lean overview and the conventions are loaded only when needed.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense directive prose with no filler and no explanations of concepts Claude already knows — nearly every sentence is an instruction, constraint, or caution (e.g. "Inventory completeness is not behavioral coverage. Do not expand a targeted maintenance request into an all-product audit."). It assumes competence; every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete commands and paths are given ("node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check", "node --test scripts/check-maps.test.mjs ...", "ui/storybook/stories/<primary-feature-area>/", "parameters.paperclip") alongside exact conventions like `home: "foundations"` and `feature-map-<area>--overview`. However, judgment-heavy steps such as "capture the existing built `index.json`" and "Record the source revision" lack concrete examples of what to do, keeping it short of fully copy-paste-ready. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The sections impose a coherent order (scope → compare/classify → identity/index → regenerate → check → report) with explicit validation commands ("Run `node scripts/storybook-catalog.mjs --check` and `node --test ...`") and sequencing cues ("Start with", "Before moves/title changes, capture..."). It falls short of 5 because there is no explicit feedback loop describing what to do when checks fail, and the sequence is implied by section order rather than explicitly numbered. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The three upstream documents are clearly signaled one level deep via links at the top, and section headers organize the procedure. But the entire operating procedure plus cataloging conventions (meta-ID stability, sidebar prefixes, generated-guide rules) live inline in one ~105-line file with no internal reference split, so a reader must load all detail to use any part — minor organization gaps rather than the ideal overview-plus-references split. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |