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 dense, highly actionable operational guide with real executable scripts and thorough validation/recovery handling. Its weaknesses are repetition of the depth-selection and lifecycle policy across sections and inlining of protocol detail that belongs in the existing reference structure.
Suggestions
Consolidate the depth-selection policy ('--fast'/'--deep'/auto justification rules) into the 'Choose when and how deeply to review' section and reduce the restatements in 'Checkpoints and final handoff', 'Configuration', and 'Guardrails' to one-line cross-references.
Turn the 'Instructions' section into an actual sequenced workflow (preflight → depth selection → submit → collect → present → act → recover) so the full lifecycle is readable as an ordered checklist instead of being spread across topic sections.
Move the async submission/polling shell recipes and the failure-shape taxonomy ('Recover a review') into a references/ file, keeping only the exit-code table and the decision rules in SKILL.md, mirroring how connected-progress.md is already handled.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Nearly all content is non-obvious operational policy rather than concepts Claude already knows, so it is not 'noticeably verbose' at level 2 — but depth-selection rules are restated in 'Choose when and how deeply to review', 'Checkpoints and final handoff', 'Configuration', and 'Guardrails', and async/recovery caveats also repeat. It is mostly efficient but could be meaningfully tightened, matching the level-3 anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The body provides copy-paste-ready commands throughout: a quick-start CLI block, an executable async-submission snippet with jq validation, a complete polling loop with traps and exit-code handling, an exit-code decision table, and a concrete context JSON example. Specific examples cover the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The lifecycle is well covered with explicit validation gates (version probe first, whoami preflight, exit-code classification, bounded retries, verify-then-re-review after fixes). It falls short of level 5 because the 'Instructions' section is only a one-line topic list — the actual end-to-end sequence must be assembled from topic-scattered sections rather than a clearly ordered workflow. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The three references (skill-updates.md, connected-progress.md, local-triage.md) are real, one level deep, and clearly signaled at their point of use. Not level 5 because roughly 150 lines of async protocol, recovery, and error-taxonomy detail are inlined in SKILL.md where a reference file would keep the overview lean. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |