Content
71%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.
The body is a concise, well-structured instruction skill with a clear verify-before-proceed feedback loop. Its main weakness is actionability: directives are concrete in intent but lack specific examples or commands that make execution unambiguous.
Suggestions
Add a brief concrete example of a to-do list entry or a sample plan file path/format to make the 'define a to-do list' step executable.
Specify the order of operations between 'ask the user' and 'spawn research tasks to verify'.
Clarify what a 'research/command' task invocation looks like so Claude knows exactly how to spawn it.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is short and lean with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; only the opening framing sentence slightly overlaps the description. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete directives (define a to-do list, spawn research tasks, read specific files) but steps like "ask the user" stay high-level and there are no concrete examples or commands tying them to execution. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear sequence exists with an explicit validation loop ("Spawn new research tasks to verify... Only proceed once you've verified the facts yourself"), with only minor gaps in ordering between asking the user and spawning tasks. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A single short skill with no bundle files and a well-organized header plus bullet list fits the simple-skill exception that allows a 5 without external references. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |