Content
40%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 body is a readable conceptual overview with good use/not-use boundaries, but it functions as an essay about the framework rather than instructions for applying it — there is no process, template, or example for actually crafting a strategic narrative. Two boilerplate sections (Domain Context, Input Requirements) pad the token budget without adding value.
Suggestions
Add a step-by-step narrative-construction workflow (e.g. Andy Raskin's sequence: name the change in the world → show winners and losers → tease the promised land → position the product as the gift → present proof) so the skill instructs rather than describes.
Delete or merge the "Domain Context" and "Input Requirements" sections — they are generic filler that applies to any PM skill.
Include one worked example (a before/after pitch opening or a short annotated narrative) demonstrating the old-game-to-new-game shift in practice.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The core sections (What It Is / When to Use / When Not to Use) are tight, but "Domain Context" ("a proven product management framework... combines best practices from industry leaders") and "Input Requirements" are generic boilerplate that adds no actionable information. Not score 4 because those two sections are pure padding; not score 2 because the substance of the skill is efficiently written. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The body explains the concept and the reframing shift ("Move from 'Here's your problem, here's our solution' to 'The world has changed...'") but gives no steps, template, or worked example for actually constructing a narrative. Not score 1 because the reframe instruction and the old-game/new-game framing are concrete direction; not score 3 because there is no process a user could follow to produce a deck or pitch from this skill. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no sequenced process at all — no steps for moving from product context to finished narrative, and no checkpoints. Not score 1 because the When to Use / When Not to Use sections give coherent decision guidance for where the skill applies; not score 3 because even a rough sequence for crafting the narrative (e.g. name the change → winners/losers → promised land → gift → proof) is missing. | 2 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is short (~54 lines) with clean, well-labeled sections and no bundle files, so no external-reference structure is needed. Not score 5 because it slightly exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill threshold and the depth needed to make this actionable (framework steps, example narratives) is absent rather than split into a reference file. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 11 / 20 Passed |