Content
82%Weight 40%Scale 1-5Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A well-structured, actionable skill body with clear phased workflow and real bundled references. Minor conciseness repetition, a missing artifact-validation checkpoint, and one dangling reference path keep it just below top marks.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation checkpoint in Phase 2 (e.g. confirm analysis.md, transcript.md, and frames/ exist and are non-empty before drafting the brief, with a fallback if transcription failed).
Remove or fix the dangling reference to scripts/eval_video_review.py in references/dependencies.md — the file is not present in the bundle.
Tighten the opening: the intro paragraph and 'What this skill does' restate the frontmatter description; collapse them into a single concise framing.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean with executable commands and tight gotchas, but the intro and 'What this skill does' section restate the frontmatter description, and a few transitions could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Copy-paste ready commands for local files, hosted URLs, and the full options example, all pointing at the real bundled script path with concrete flags. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Phases 1-3 are clearly sequenced and the transcription fallback order acts as a resilience checkpoint, but there is no explicit validation that the bundle/artifacts are complete before producing the brief. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Body cleanly signals one-level-deep references to dependencies.md and output-schema.md (both real files), but dependencies.md references a non-existent scripts/eval_video_review.py, a minor bundle-integrity gap. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |