Content
85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is actionable and well-sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints and clean section organization. The main weakness is redundancy from repeating the full command signature in several places, which could be trimmed for token efficiency.
Suggestions
Define the command signature once in Usage and reference it from Instructions/Examples instead of repeating the full flags each time.
Consider collapsing the 'Explicit invocation only' and 'When NOT to invoke' sections, which overlap on the same guard concept.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence without explaining known concepts, but the full command signature is repeated across Usage, the Instructions header, and the Examples, so it 'could be tightened'. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, executable commands (roborev review --branch --wait, git rev-parse --verify) with real flags and a complete base-branch snippet, fitting 'fully executable code/commands; copy-paste ready'. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear four-step sequence (validate → run → present → offer next steps) includes an explicit validation gate ('If validation fails... Do not proceed') and error-recovery guidance, matching the 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps' anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files are needed for this single-workflow skill; the body is well-organized into clearly signaled sections with a 'See also' navigation block, so well-organized self-contained structure earns the top anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |