Content
62%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured procedural skill with strong workflow clarity, featuring explicit hard gates and refusal conditions that make the process safe and bounded. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (motivational content, concept explanations Claude doesn't need) and a lack of concrete examples like sample hypotheses, calculation commands, or filled-out templates. The monolithic structure is acceptable but could benefit from splitting detailed sections into referenced files.
Suggestions
Add a concrete example of a well-formed hypothesis and a poorly-formed one to make the Hypothesis Quality Checklist more actionable.
Include a specific sample size calculation formula or reference to a tool/command (e.g., a Python snippet using statsmodels) rather than just listing the required inputs.
Remove the 'Final Reminder' motivational section and trim the 'Purpose & Scope' section — Claude doesn't need encouragement to follow instructions.
Consider extracting the 'Analyzing Results' and 'Documentation & Learning' sections into separate referenced files to improve progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably structured but includes some unnecessary padding — the 'Final Reminder' motivational section, the 'Purpose & Scope' preamble, and the 'When to Use' / 'Limitations' boilerplate add little value. Claude already understands A/B testing concepts like peeking and statistical power; the skill should focus on the procedural gates rather than explaining why they matter. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides clear checklists and gate conditions, which are actionable for a process-oriented skill. However, it lacks concrete examples — e.g., a sample hypothesis statement, a sample size calculation formula or tool command, or a filled-out test record template. The guidance is specific enough to follow but not copy-paste ready. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The multi-step process is clearly sequenced with numbered phases, two explicit hard gates (Hypothesis Lock and Execution Readiness Gate), and clear refusal conditions. The workflow includes validation checkpoints and feedback loops (e.g., 'If assumptions are weak → warn and recommend delaying'; 'If any item is missing, stop and resolve it'). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic single file with no references to supporting documents. At ~150 lines covering hypothesis design, metrics, sample sizing, execution, analysis, and documentation, some sections (e.g., detailed analysis discipline, documentation templates) could be split into separate referenced files. However, the internal section structure with clear headers is reasonable. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |