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 content is an exceptionally concise, well-structured planning procedure with clear sequencing and an appropriate ripple-flag checkpoint. Its only soft spot is actionability, where a brief concrete plan-entry example would push it to fully executable.
Suggestions
Add a one-line example of a plan entry (e.g., a sample file-list + interface line) to make the guidance copy-paste concrete.
Consider an explicit final checkpoint such as 'Confirm the plan names a smallest interface and flags ripples before handing off.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is a lean six-line numbered procedure with zero over-explanation and no padding, assuming Claude's competence and earning every token, matching the anchor-5 example. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | The numbered steps are concrete and executable ('List the files to touch and why', 'Name the smallest interface that satisfies it') with only minor abstraction, sitting above the vague/gap anchors but short of fully copy-paste-ready specificity. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered sequence with a built-in ripple-checkpoint (step 4) for a single-purpose non-destructive skill fits the 'clear sequence with most checkpoints' anchor; it lacks an explicit plan-verification feedback loop that would reach 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no need for external references and a well-organized numbered structure, which per the simple-skills guideline allows a 5 on progressive disclosure without separate files. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |