Content
75%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 well-structured, actionable routing contract with a clear decision tree and failure handling. It loses points mainly for mild redundancy between the Purpose and Decision Tree sections and the absence of explicit validation checkpoints around log writes.
Suggestions
Collapse the 'Purpose' section into the opening paragraph to remove overlap with the Decision Tree.
Add an explicit verification checkpoint before durable log writes (e.g., confirm the target store is reachable and the record is not already present).
Trim the marketing-style framing in the opening line ('always-on... preventing wasted LLM context') to pure routing guidance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The decision tree and rules are lean and assume Claude's competence; the 'Purpose' section lightly restates the decision tree and the opening paragraph has minor framing padding that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete routing directives ('Query before generating', 'Write durable facts to Obsidian') and explicit invocation commands make the guidance executable; as an instruction-only skill the lack of code is not penalized. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The decision tree gives a clear routing sequence and the Failure Modes section supplies error-recovery fallbacks, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints before log writes. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is organized into well-labeled sections with one-level external references and companion-skill pointers; no nested references, though the body is self-contained with no bundle files to split into. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |