Content
37%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is concise but lacks actionable content. It reads more like a role description than an instructional skill. Claude would not know how to actually write a UI component spec from this content - there are no templates, examples, format specifications, or process steps.
Suggestions
Add a concrete template or example of what a completed UI component spec should look like (e.g., spec for a Button component with states, variants, interactions)
Define the specific format/structure for specs - what sections are required, what information goes in each section
Add a step-by-step workflow: 1. Identify component states 2. Define each variant 3. Document interactions 4. Validate against design system
Include example output showing the expected file structure and content in `docs/ui/components/`
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is extremely lean with no unnecessary explanations. Every line serves a purpose - role, responsibilities, triggers, and output location. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides no concrete guidance on HOW to write UI/UX specs. It lists responsibilities abstractly ('상태별 디자인 정의', '인터랙션 정의') without examples, templates, or executable instructions. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow or process is defined. The skill doesn't explain how to approach spec writing, what steps to follow, or how to validate the output quality. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is appropriately brief for an overview, and references an output location. However, there are no links to templates, examples, or detailed guides that would help Claude actually perform the task. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |