Content
86%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 body is an exemplary lean orchestrator: a concrete routing table, explicit inputs/outputs, and per-stage validation checklists with zero wasted tokens. The only meaningful gap is the absence of worked examples showing what a stage's questions or deliverable output should look like, and no failure path when a checklist item is not satisfied.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and directive throughout ('한 번에 9개를 만들지 않는다', '모르는 숫자는 [가정]으로 표기한다', '참가자가 막히면 선택지를 3개 제시한다') with zero concept explanations or padding, matching the anchor 'every token earns its place'. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | As an instruction-only orchestrator it provides concrete routing (9 named sub-skills each mapped to a deliverable), explicit input and output specs ('질문 최대 5개'), and specific operational rules, but it lacks worked examples of a stage's output or question patterns, keeping it below fully-executable anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 9-step sequence is clearly ordered and each stage ends with an explicit checklist ('각 단계 종료 시 아래를 확인한다') plus a stuck-recovery rule, but there is no instruction for what to do when a checklist item fails (redo the stage or proceed), a minor validation gap that fits anchor 4 rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a lean, self-contained router with well-organized sections (purpose, order, inputs, outputs, rules, checklist); all stage detail appropriately lives in the routed sub-skills, and nothing is inlined that belongs in a separate file, satisfying the simple-skill exception for well-organized single-file skills. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |