Content
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A solid, actionable template skill with good progressive disclosure, but the inline template duplicates the reference file and no explicit production workflow is given.
Suggestions
Trim the inline template to a minimal skeleton and defer the full version to references/template.md to remove duplication and save tokens.
Add a short numbered workflow for producing a spec (e.g., 1. Gather requirements, 2. Draft sections, 3. Stakeholder review, 4. Iterate) with explicit checkpoints.
Add a brief validation step (e.g., 'Confirm every P0 requirement has acceptance criteria before marking In Review') to close the workflow loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient with no concept over-explanation, but the inline ~80-line template substantially duplicates sections (metadata, goals, requirements, technical design, testing, risks) also present in references/template.md, so tokens could be trimmed. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides a copy-paste-ready template with real SQL DDL, concrete API request/response examples, measurable NFRs ('Response time < 200ms', '99.9% uptime'), and concrete Do/Don't guidance — fully executable scaffolding. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The template sections imply an order, but there is no explicit sequenced process or checkpoints for producing a spec (e.g., gather requirements → draft → stakeholder review); guidance is present but the workflow is implicit. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Clear overview with a well-signaled, one-level-deep reference to references/template.md (verified to exist), accompanied by a bulleted list of what the reference contains — easy navigation, no nested references. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |