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.
A well-structured methodology skill: a four-dimension framework with concrete counts, sources, and outputs, a clear workflow, and clean one-level-deep progressive disclosure to real reference files. It falls short of top marks only on minor redundancy, missing inline worked examples, and absent validation checkpoints in the workflow.
Suggestions
Consolidate the per-dimension output specs (segment counts, competitor depth, territory counts) into one place — they currently appear both in the dimension sections and again in the workflow steps.
Add one inline worked example of a positioning territory statement (the statement / why it works / who resonates / risk fields filled in) so the per-territory documentation format is copy-paste ready.
Insert a validation checkpoint into the workflow (e.g., after audience research, confirm the 1-3 segments with the user before proceeding to competitor and territory work) to catch wrong-direction discovery early.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with domain-specific guidance (four dimensions with sources, outputs, and failure patterns) and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but there is minor redundancy — each dimension's output is stated both in its section and again in the workflow steps, and a few aphorisms ("The third is most often forgotten and most often the actual competitor") could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | For an instruction-only skill the guidance is concrete and specific — "5 to 8 interviews if possible", "3 to 8 competitors deep, including indirect and status-quo competitors", "3 to 5 distinct territories", per-competitor documentation fields, and a numbered report structure with a referenced template — but there is no inline worked example of a territory statement or competitor matrix row, which keeps it short of fully copy-paste-ready guidance. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 8-step workflow is clearly sequenced with scope calibration ("1 week for a startup pre-launch. 4 to 6 weeks for a major rebrand") and a substantive failure-patterns section, but there are no explicit validate/retry checkpoints (e.g., confirming segments with the user before generating territories), which the score-5 anchor requires. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is an overview that delegates heavy material to two well-signaled, one-level-deep references (references/discovery-report-template.md and references/interview-guide.md, both present in the bundle), each linked inline in the workflow and again in a dedicated Reference files section. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |