Content
72%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.
The body is concise and well-organized for a simple single-purpose skill, but the actual operations lack executable commands and the workflow is not sequenced with an explicit validation loop. The verification reminder is a good but incomplete checkpoint.
Suggestions
Add concrete executable commands or a script reference for cleaning loop state/worktree references and recording the event, so the guidance is copy-paste ready.
Lay out the steps as an explicit numbered sequence (clean state -> record event -> verify) with a validate-and-retry loop.
Specify how to verify completion concretely (e.g. the exact command/output to check) rather than only stating 'do not claim completion without evidence'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean with no concept over-explanation; every line states a concrete instruction or constraint, assuming Claude's competence. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | The guidance is specific (named paths like '~/.pua/config.json', concrete constraints) but provides no executable commands or scripts for how to clean state or record the event, leaving key details missing. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | There is a verification cue ('Do not claim completion without command/output evidence') but the state-cleanup/config-modification steps are not sequenced and there is no validate-then-fix feedback loop, capping it at 3 per the destructive-operation guideline. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a short single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no need for external references, and the content is well-organized under a clear heading. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |