Content
73%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 rigorous, well-sequenced procedure for a high-stakes archive/delivery workflow: concrete CLI commands, an explicit option table, thorough validation, and recovery guidance. Its weaknesses are token redundancy from repeated authorization caveats and two delivery steps (push, PR creation) that stop short of executable commands.
Suggestions
State the 'branch_status: handled neither authorizes nor proves delivery' rule once (e.g., in Step 4 where handled is set) and reference it from Steps 1 and 5 instead of repeating it three times.
Add the executable commands for Option B and C in Step 5 — the actual git push command for the confirmed remote/branch and the concrete PR-creation command (e.g., gh pr create with base/target) for the configured integration.
Move the delivery-record field semantics (input file placement, case-variant/alias collision handling, receipt vs. tracked delivery.json rules) into a reference file and keep a short rule list in SKILL.md to reduce inline density.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is instruction-dense with no concept explanations Claude already knows, but it repeats the same caveat multiple times — 'handled is only a legacy compatibility field. It neither authorizes local/push/pr nor proves those actions succeeded' appears in Steps 1, 4, and 5 — and the Step 1 delivery-record paragraph stacks many clauses that could be tightened. This fits 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened', trending toward verbose rather than toward the lean anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Most steps give copy-paste-ready commands (comet state select/check/delivery/transition, comet archive, comet guard, git add/diff --cached/commit) plus concrete JSON examples and an A–E decision table. It falls short of fully executable because Option B and C in Step 5 say only 'push the bound branch once' and 'create a PR through the configured GitHub integration' without the actual git push or PR-creation commands. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 0 through 5 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints (comet guard archive, state delivery --verify, stop-on-failure conditions) and feedback loops ('If a hook rejects the commit, retain staged contents, correct the message, and continue the same commit'; 'On timeout or an uncertain response, inspect the actual result before retrying'). The Exit conditions section provides a checklist, satisfying the top anchor for a destructive multi-step workflow. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | References (comet-classic/reference/classic-layout.md, scripts.md, context-recovery.md, decision-point.md) are one level deep and clearly signaled with purpose at each mention, and sections are well-organized (Prerequisites, Steps, Exit conditions, Completion, Recover). It stays at 4 because no bundle files exist to verify the referenced paths against, and dense rule content such as the delivery-record field semantics in Step 1 is inlined where a split-out reference would keep the body leaner. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |