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.
A well-structured opinionated methodology skill: concrete interview prompts, an explicit litmus test, a 12-point audit framework, and exemplary progressive disclosure with every reference link resolving to a real one-level-deep file. Its weakness is repetition — the intro and closing restate the description and the ritual-vs-tool argument — and worked-example sets that re-teach textbook JTBD Claude already knows.
Suggestions
Remove the 'Closing: jobs over features' section and compress the opening paragraphs — both restate the frontmatter description and the ritual-vs-analytical-tool distinction already made in 'Where JTBD adds clarity vs where it becomes ritual', cutting roughly 20 lines of repetition.
Trim the worked examples for the job-statement structure and the functional/emotional/social dimensions to one example each in the body — the full sets re-teach standard JTBD and duplicate detail already available in references/job-statement-structure-patterns.md and references/functional-emotional-social-dimensions.md.
Add an explicit validation checkpoint to each application mode's sequence — e.g., after clustering jobs in discovery, apply the honest-signal check ('can a recent product decision be traced to this analysis?') before proceeding — so the workflows have inline checkpoints instead of relying on a separate section.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The opening paragraphs restate the frontmatter description nearly verbatim and the closing section re-argues the ritual-vs-analytical-tool distinction already covered in 'Where JTBD adds clarity vs where it becomes ritual', and the full worked-example sets for the job-statement structure and the functional/emotional/social dimensions re-teach standard JTBD that Claude already knows. This is more than the 'minor instances' of over-explanation at score 4, but most sections (failure modes, the 12 considerations, skill boundaries) are tight and skill-specific, keeping it above score 2's 'several padded sections'. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Gives directly usable guidance: copy-ready interview prompts ('Walk me through the last time you did X', 'What made you switch?'), a decision litmus test, bulleted hire/fire criteria, a 12-point application/audit checklist, and per-symptom failure-mode cures. Not 5 because a few steps stay at framing level with the how deferred to references ('Cluster jobs across users. Name jobs from the clusters'); not 3 because the prompts, checklist, and reframing questions are concrete and executable rather than abstract. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 12 considerations form a sequenced audit checklist, and the litmus test, the 'honest signal', the data-availability rule, and the failure-mode symptom→cure mapping act as validation checkpoints with recovery paths. Not 5 because the application-mode sequences (e.g., discovery's four steps) carry no inline checkpoints and there is no explicit validate→fix→retry loop in the main flow. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Each major section ends with 'Detail in [references/...]' and all 8 linked paths resolve to real files in references/ exactly one level deep, with no nested references; a final 'Reference files' section catalogs all 8 with one-line summaries. Structure matches the clear-overview, well-signaled, one-level-deep pattern exactly, so there is no organization gap to justify 4. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |