Content
92%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 tight, well-structured read-only audit skill: lean prose, concrete tool usage with required parameters, a clear sequenced workflow with validation checkpoints, and clean sectioning. The only small gap is the absence of a concrete rendered example of a triage finding bullet.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient with no padding — it assumes Claude knows what wiki pages and provenance are, jumps straight into the workflow, and every line (the seven issues, severity buckets, log template, tool list) earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance throughout: named tools with required parameters ('always passing the operation issue's wikiId and spaceSlug'), an exact log-entry template, and per-finding required fields (file path, evidence quote, suggested fix, follow-up operation). Minor gap: no literal example of a finished triage bullet, so the output format is specified by structure rather than shown. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear five-step sequence with explicit read-only checkpoint ('Do not write to wiki/'), a dedicated Verification checklist with feedback-style gates (no raw/ or wiki/ modified except log.md; close as 'no findings' if empty), and severity grouping — exactly the validate/checkpoint pattern the rubric rewards for batch read-only operations. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines with no external references needed; it is organized into well-signaled sections (Inputs, Workflow, Voice, Verification, Tools) and the rubric's scoring note allows a 5 for short, single-purpose skills with well-organized sections and no required bundle files. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |