Content
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is reasonably lean and well-organized for a short, single-file skill, but its guidance is mostly abstract with no concrete examples or explicit validation checkpoints, leaving actionability and workflow clarity at the middle level. It works as a high-level checklist but does not give copy-paste-ready instruction.
Suggestions
Add a concrete runnable example of a temporal python test file and how its output drives the next decision, to lift actionability.
Insert an explicit validation checkpoint in the testing workflow (e.g., "if execution fails, fix the assumption and re-run until the output confirms the logic").
Remove the repeated frontmatter description from the body and tighten redundant lines to improve conciseness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~35-line body is lean and avoids over-explaining concepts Claude knows, but repeats the frontmatter description ("Structure a research based on the user request. Identify what must change...") and contains rough, slightly redundant phrasing like "everything must be collapse in the research file", fitting "mostly efficient but could be tightened"; not level 3 due to redundancy, not level 1 because it is not padded. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It offers some concrete specifics ("create a folder under .cursor/plans", "save all your discoveries under .cursor/plans/{plan_name_folder}/research", "Create temporal python files... Execute this python code") but mostly vague direction ("Make reasonable technical decisions", "Identify what should be change") with no executable commands or examples, matching "some concrete guidance but incomplete"; not level 1 because concrete paths exist, not level 3 because nothing is copy-paste ready. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The "You must:" bullet list provides steps and the testing section implies validate-by-execution, but there is no explicit validation checkpoint or validate→fix→retry feedback loop, and for a skill involving test validation such checkpoints matter, matching "steps listed but validation gaps"; not level 3 because checkpoints are missing, not level 1 because steps are listed. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is a single self-contained file under 50 lines with no bundle files and no external references, organized into clear sections (## Python test validations, ## Document base); per the simple-skills note this warrants a 3 for well-organized content, not level 2 because no inline content should be split out. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |