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.
This is a well-structured, instruction-only skill: it sequences the commit workflow clearly with user-confirmation and pre-commit validation checkpoints, and stays lean. Its main weaknesses are minor — a missing example commit message and an under-specified recovery path when pre-commit checks fail.
Suggestions
Include one example commit message showing the expected imperative-mood, why-focused style.
Clarify what to do when `pre-commit run --all-files` fails (e.g., fix the flagged files and re-run before committing) instead of "If rules like pre-commit are missing, solve them".
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is efficient with concrete commands ("Run `git status`", "Use `pre-commit run --all-files`"), but the "Remember" section contains motivational filler like "The user trusts your judgment - they asked you to commit" that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is mostly executable: specific commands, the verbatim confirmation question, and rules like "never use `-A` or `.`". Minor gaps remain — no example commit message is shown and "If rules like pre-commit are missing, solve them" is vague. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The four-step sequence (think, plan, present, execute) is clear with real checkpoints: user confirmation before executing, pre-commit validation, and verification via `git log --oneline`. It falls short of 5 only because there is no explicit recovery loop when pre-commit checks fail on the staged files. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references, and its sections (Process, Important, Remember) are well organized — meeting the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |