Content
88%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, highly actionable instruction skill with concrete parameters, templates, and a workflow containing genuine validation and feedback loops. The only weaknesses are minor redundancy between the failure-patterns section and earlier phases, and slight duplication between the body's interview anti-patterns and the external template.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense with specifics ("60 minutes, 5 to 15 participants", "$50 to $150 for 60 minutes", "Recruit 7 to schedule 5") and explains nothing Claude already knows, but the "Failure patterns" section restates warnings already given in phases 3-5, which is minor trimmable redundancy. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully executable for an instruction-only skill: exact output file names ("research-plan-[topic].md", "interview-guide-[topic].md"), a copy-paste findings document structure, concrete probe phrasing ("Tell me about the last time..."), and a weak/better question rewrite table cover the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-phase framework plus 9-step workflow has explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops: "Pilot. Run 1 to 2 sessions before the main batch. Refine the guide", "Test the insight against the data. If the insight only fits some interviews, it's a hypothesis", and "Track impact. Did decisions change...". | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The single reference (references/interview-guide-template.md) is real, clearly signaled with a markdown link and one-line description, and one level deep; however, the "Conduct" section's anti-patterns (leading questions, hypotheticals, filling silence) duplicate the reference's "Things to avoid", a minor organization gap. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |