Content
85%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 well-structured router skill: executable readiness checking up front, a single crisp decision rule with a decision table, explicit handoff boundaries, and disciplined conditional references that exist in the bundle. The residual costs are minor — a placeholder (`<spec>`) left undefined at the top level, one route with no command shape, and some deliberate repetition of the core decision rule.
Suggestions
Add a one-line inline definition of the `<spec>` syntax (e.g. "comma-separated N:provider tokens like `2:claude,1:codex`") next to the team command shape, so the most common edit route is executable without opening the reference file.
Give the headless-worktrees row at least a minimal command shape (e.g. `quintet worktrees <spec> "<task>"`) or a one-phrase pointer in the routing table, matching the pattern of the other rows.
State the edits-vs-opinions rule once authoritatively in "Choosing the mode" and let the routing table and troubleshooting row reference it rather than restate it, trimming a few repeated sentences.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body assumes Claude's competence throughout — no explaining what tmux, worktrees, or OAuth are — and every section carries routing-relevant detail. It stops short of the 5 anchor because the edits-vs-opinions rule is stated three times ("Choosing the mode", the routing table, and the troubleshooting row) and the router-boundary point is repeated in both the intro and the handoff section; the repetition is deliberate emphasis but not every token earns its place. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, mostly copy-paste-ready guidance throughout: an executable doctor snippet with a fallback resolution chain, a parseable `quintet providers` output format, and command shapes for every common route (`quintet consult "<q>" [providers]`, `quintet debate`, `quintet review`, `quintet pipeline init`). The gap against the 5 anchor: the `<spec>` placeholder in the team command is never defined in SKILL.md itself (it lives one reference deep), and the headless-worktrees row gives no command at all, deferring entirely to the owner skill. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The sequence is explicit and gated: "First step, every time" runs doctor with a hard stop condition ("If doctor shows zero ready providers, stop"), mode selection is resolved by one stated question with a decision table, ambiguity triggers an explicit ask-first rule, and handoff boundaries name which skill owns each step. Validation checkpoints are present for the risky parts — readiness validation before launch, "Confirm scope with the user before launching write-capable workers", "Always `quintet team shutdown <name>` when work is verified or abandoned" — and the troubleshooting table provides symptom→cause→fix feedback loops. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | SKILL.md is a true router overview, and both bundle files exist and are one level deep with explicit load conditions: the mode-decision tree is offered "For the team↔fleet decision at a glance" with "Skip it once the edits-vs-opinions question already answers the route", orchestration-details.md is gated to "only when you're actually sequencing a two-phase request", and the cross-skill provider-strengths reference carries a "Do NOT load" condition for fleet-only routes. Content is appropriately split with clear signals, matching the well-signaled one-level-deep anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |