Content
72%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-structured with excellent progressive disclosure via the reference table. It is weakened by a lack of executable examples and a missing validation checkpoint, which matter for a test-implementation skill.
Suggestions
Add a minimal concrete example (a short AAA test snippet or the command to run the configured test runner) so guidance is executable rather than purely descriptive.
Include an explicit verification step in the workflow, e.g. 'Run the suite with the repo's configured runner and confirm the new tests pass before finishing'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean (~25 lines) with no concept-explanation padding; it assumes Claude's competence and every line earns its place, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The AAA and independence rules are concrete directives, but for a test-implementation skill there is no executable code, command, or example test in the body, leaving guidance instructive rather than copy-paste ready. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear AAA sequence and a test-type selection table are present, but there is no validation/verification checkpoint (e.g. run the suite, confirm tests pass), which caps workflow clarity at 2 for a test-writing context. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A clear Reference Selection table signals one-level-deep links to references/frontend.md and references/e2e.md (both verified to exist), with overview principles kept inline — well-organized and easy to navigate. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |