Content
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured orchestration skill with clear workflows, good sequencing, and explicit validation checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are the lack of concrete, executable tool invocation examples (showing exact parameter syntax) and some redundancy between the main sections and the 'Red Flags' summary. The content would benefit from actual code/command examples showing tool calls with real parameters.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable examples of tool invocations (e.g., exact TaskCreate and SendMessage calls with all required parameters) to improve actionability from descriptive to copy-paste ready.
Remove or consolidate the 'Red Flags' section since most items duplicate guidance already stated in earlier sections, improving conciseness.
Consider providing a bundle file (e.g., EXAMPLES.md) with full worked examples of team orchestration scenarios to improve progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Generally efficient but has some redundancy — the 'Red Flags' section largely restates guidance already given in earlier sections (e.g., 'Do not re-spawn teammates' is stated twice). The parallelism table and lifecycle diagram are concise and earn their tokens, but some sections like 'Integration' add little value. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides structured guidance with specific tool names (TeamCreate, TaskCreate, TaskUpdate, SendMessage) and naming conventions, but lacks executable code examples — most instructions are descriptive rather than copy-paste ready. The config file read path is concrete, but actual tool invocation syntax/parameters are never shown. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Multi-step processes are clearly sequenced: team setup (create → spawn → verify), task coordination (create → dependencies → assign → monitor), plan approval (exit plan mode → review → approve/reject), and shutdown (verify → request → wait → delete). Validation checkpoints are explicit (verify team config, check TaskList before shutdown), and the plan approval flow includes a feedback loop for rejection. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear section headers and a logical flow from setup through shutdown. However, with no bundle files, all content is inline in a single file. The 'Integration' section references domain skills but doesn't link to any concrete files. For a skill of this complexity, some content (e.g., the parallelism rules table, red flags checklist) could be split out. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |