Content
68%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 dense, expert-level ruleset that is highly actionable and respects the reader's intelligence — nearly every line encodes a non-obvious project decision rather than general knowledge. The gaps are a workflow with no validation step despite defaulting to applying fixes, and a rules section that is heavy for a single file with no bundle to distribute it into.
Suggestions
Add a verification step after applying fixes, e.g. "4. Run typecheck/tests on the changed files and re-audit the scope to confirm no rule violations remain" — especially important since fix defaults to true.
Tighten the multi-clause parenthetical rules (lines 30, 33, 37) into shorter single-purpose bullets so each rule is scannable on first read.
If the skill grows, move the detailed query-key/mutation rules into a references/ file and keep SKILL.md as the overview, which would also make the delegation to `.claude/rules/sim-queries.md` less load-bearing.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes competence: it never explains what React Query is or how it works, and every rule adds non-obvious, project-specific constraints (e.g. "a 'use client' export called from the server crashes SSR"). It falls short of anchor 5 because several rules are packed into long parenthetical sentences (lines 30, 33, 37) that require re-reading to parse and could be tightened. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Mostly concrete and executable: exact expressions like "Boolean(id) && (options?.enabled ?? true)", concrete module paths ("hooks/queries/utils/"), specific APIs ("queryClient.prefetchQuery", "onSettled"), and unambiguous do/don't pairs. It is not fully copy-paste ready at anchor 5 because enforcement details are delegated to the external `.claude/rules/sim-queries.md` and there are no complete code examples showing a correct hook inline. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The three-step sequence (read references, analyze scope, apply or propose fixes) is clear, but it has no validation checkpoints. Because the skill defaults to fix=true and applies changes across a whole scope (a batch modification), the missing verification step (e.g. re-check types/tests after fixes) caps workflow clarity at 3 per the feedback-loops guideline. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist, and the body is well-organized into Context, References, Rules, and Steps with clearly signaled one-level-deep references (three named tkdodo.eu URLs with what each covers, plus explicitly scoped pointers to `.claude/rules/sim-queries.md` sections). Not anchor 5 because the dense Rules sections are somewhat monolithic — the query-key rules would sit more naturally in a separate reference file if a bundle existed — and the mandatory "read these before analyzing" external URLs make the entry point depend on outside navigation. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |