Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is concise and well-organized with concrete, API-specific code for both sub-commands, but the examples are not self-contained because key context and variables are left undefined.
Suggestions
Make code snippets copy-paste ready by showing how ctx and the key variables (decision_id, depth, reasoning_result) are obtained before they are used.
In the decision section, clarify when to use ctx.trace_decision_explainability versus ExplanationGenerator, since the two paths are presented without explicit sequencing.
Reconcile the CLI flag '--detail <level>' with the code's 'detail_level=detail' so the binding between the argument and the parameter is explicit.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean: a one-line intro, two compact command sections each with a signature, short code, and expected output, with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Code uses real imports and APIs (ExplanationGenerator, ctx.trace_decision_explainability, ctx.get_causal_chain), but ctx and several variables (decision_id, depth, reasoning_result, detail) are undefined, so snippets are not copy-paste ready and miss key setup details. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | This is a simple read-only explanation skill with a clear two-command structure (decision vs graph), each showing the call and its expected output; no validation checkpoints are needed for non-destructive operations. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no bundle files present and no need for external references; the content is well-organized into clearly headed sections, satisfying the simple-skill allowance for a top score. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |