Content
93%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.
The content is an exemplar of a lean, actionable skill: concrete commands, complete code examples, exact paths, and a clear numbered workflow with important callouts. The only gap is the absence of an explicit validation/feedback loop for when a test fails.
Suggestions
Add a short validation step, e.g. "If the snapshot test fails, review the rendered diff and update the fixture only if the change is intentional" — this would close the feedback-loop gap in workflow clarity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence: no library or concept explanations, just paths, a runnable command, and two complete code examples. Every token earns its place, matching anchor 5; there is no padding to trim for anchor 4. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully executable: a concrete run command ("bunx vitest src/test/video.test.tsx"), copy-paste-ready fixture and test code, and exact file paths for every step. This matches anchor 5 (copy-paste ready, covers the common case), exceeding anchor 4's "minor gaps". | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The "Adding a new test" section gives a clear 5-step sequence with exact paths and two "Important" callouts, and step 4 (running the test) acts as a checkpoint. It sits at anchor 4 rather than 5 because there is no explicit error-recovery feedback loop (e.g. what to do when the snapshot test fails or output needs review). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the skill is a simple, self-contained task with well-organized sections ("Example", "Adding a new test"). Per the guideline that simple skills without external references can score 5 with just well-organized sections, this matches anchor 5; nothing is inlined that belongs in a separate file. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |