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 compact, well-structured instruction skill with concrete evaluation criteria, an exact output location, and a copy-ready template. Its main gaps are the unspecified search approach and the absence of any validation checkpoint before the recommendation is documented.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows, but the intro paragraph largely repeats the frontmatter description and the Invocation section is harness boilerplate that could be trimmed, matching anchor 4 ("Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed") rather than anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete guidance throughout — the five explicit scoring criteria ("ease of deployment, community support, resource usage, security posture, maintenance burden"), the exact vault path "Homelab/Research/topic.md", and a copy-ready output template. Not 5 because step 2 ("Search for candidates") leaves sources and search strategy unspecified, and there is no worked example of a scored row. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Six clearly sequenced steps (define, survey, evaluate, compare, recommend, document) where the evaluation step acts as an implicit checkpoint before recommending. No explicit validation steps exist, but the operation is non-destructive and single-output, so the workflow-clarity cap does not apply; this keeps it at anchor 4 rather than anchor 5's explicit validation feedback loops. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references (references/ and scripts/ are empty), and the body is organized into clear sections (Invocation, Workflow Steps, Output Format, Companion Skills) — the simple-skill exception in the scoring notes applies. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |