Content
67%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 strong, code-dense reference for adopting samber/do: executable examples, a clear usage sequence, and properly split advanced/testing references. It is dragged down by duplicated content — the same code snippet appears twice under different labels and the MustInvoke rationale is explained twice — plus some inline material that should live in references.
Suggestions
Fix the eager-service registration example (lines 92-93): it repeats the do.ProvideValue(injector, &Config{Port: 8080}) snippet verbatim from the value-registration example, so no actual eager-registration code is ever shown.
Explain the MustInvoke-inside-providers rationale once: either the three-bullet explanation at lines 109-113 or Best Practice 6 (line 199), not both — the full argument currently appears twice in quick succession.
Trim the persona paragraph and the 'Type-safe dependency injection toolkit for Go based on Go 1.18+ generics' intro line, which restate the frontmatter description, and consider moving the sibling-skill cross-reference list into references.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient, but there is real duplication and padding: the 'Register an eager service' comment (lines 92-93) repeats the exact ProvideValue snippet from lines 84-85, and the MustInvoke panic-recovery rationale is argued in full at lines 109-113 and restated as Best Practice 6 at line 199. The persona paragraph and 'Type-safe dependency injection toolkit…' intro also restate the description. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable Go throughout — registration, invocation, implicit aliasing, named services, do.Package(), and a complete main() with signal-based shutdown, plus API quick-reference tables. Held below 5 by the duplicated/mislabeled eager-registration example and reliance on undefined placeholder types. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The adoption flow is clearly sequenced (Define/Register → Invoke → Dependencies → Aliasing → Named, then Package Organization → Full Application Setup) but there is no explicit verification step (e.g., building or health-checking to confirm the DI graph wires up), placing it between the 4 and 5 anchors. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-signaled one-level-deep references to real files (./references/advanced.md, ./references/testing.md, neither nesting further) with a sensible core/advanced split. However, the extended MustInvoke-vs-Invoke rationale and the cross-references to sibling skills are inline content that belongs in a reference file. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |