Content
76%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 lean, well-structured instruction-only skill with a concrete panel recipe, clear inputs, and a strong copy-paste output template that Claude could execute immediately. The main gaps are the absence of an explicit step sequence or mode-selection guidance (workflow is implied by section order) and the lack of a worked example.
Suggestions
Add a short numbered workflow (e.g., 1. 입력 확인·보완 질문 2. 모드 선택 3. 패널 5인 구성 4. 공통 형식으로 출력) so the execution order is explicit rather than implied by section order.
Add one line per mode on when to choose it (e.g., 'persona-panel' vs 'full-report') and which template sections apply to each, so mode selection and per-mode output variation are unambiguous.
Include one compact worked example — a filled persona row and one objection row with severity and required evidence — to anchor output quality for the template.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every section is functional: mode entries are one-liners, the safety statement is two sentences, and the output template carries real scaffolding weight; nothing explains concepts Claude already knows. This matches 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place'. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | The body gives concrete executable material — a five-role panel recipe ("얼리어답터...엣지 케이스 또는 비사용자"), a five-part input list, and a copy-paste output template with tables for "반응 분포", "주요 반대 논리", and "다음 실재 검증". Not 5: there is no worked example, and no guidance on how the common output format adapts per mode (e.g., what a message-test result looks like vs. an objection-map). | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The components appear in a natural execution order (모드 → 입력 → 패널 구성 규칙 → 출력 공통 형식) but no explicit step sequence or mode-selection guidance is given, so the workflow is implicit. This matches 'sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit'; the destructive/batch cap does not apply since the task is generative and non-destructive, but it cannot reach 4 without an explicitly stated sequence. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and none are referenced, so there are no dangling or nested references; the ~74-line body is self-contained with seven clear, well-ordered sections. Not 5: it sits above the under-50-line simple-skill threshold and the ~30-line output template could arguably live in a reference file, though inlining is defensible at this size. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |