Content
67%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 instruction-only skill with a clear phase sequence, fixed walkable checklists, and a properly signaled single reference file. Its main weakness is token economy: dense rhetorical prose and repeated statements of the same rules across four sections inflate the body well beyond what the methodology requires.
Suggestions
Tighten the prose: cut the rhetorical justifications and state each rule once — the refuse-rather-than-guess rule currently appears in four places (Critical rules, Walk the surfaces, Sweep, and its own section).
Move the question-asking etiquette and the Common failures catalogue into a reference file, keeping SKILL.md as a lean overview of the Cut → Ground → Walk → Sweep → Write flow.
Add an explicit final verification step after writing the artifact — re-read the task and confirm every surface item and all nine sweep dimensions have a recorded landing — to close the workflow's validation loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is ~186 lines of dense prose. It never explains concepts Claude already knows, but it is heavily padded with rhetorical justification ('A round number the skill suggests is an opinion dressed as arithmetic', 'The default buys something real, too') and the refuse-rather-than-guess rule is restated across Cut, Walk the surfaces, Sweep, its own section, and Common failures. Not 2: the content is genuinely novel methodology rather than unnecessary explanation of known things; not 4: noticeable trimming of the persuasive asides and repetition is possible without losing clarity. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance for an instruction-only skill: fixed walkable lists (the five-row surface table, the nine named sweep dimensions), a controlled landing vocabulary ('a criterion already in the source, existing behaviour, n/a, or Unresolved'), a five-item criterion gate, and a worked split example (the p95 percentile line split into criterion plus observability target). Not 5: no complete worked example of the output artifact inline — the format is delegated to references/document-format.md — so the common case is covered by reference rather than by a copy-paste-ready model. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The sequence is explicit and well-marked: Cut → Ground → Walk the surfaces → Sweep → the refuse-rather-than-guess gate → Format → Output, reinforced by the ASCII diagram and numbered Examples. Checkpoints exist inside the flow (the five-question gate before writing any criterion, mandatory recorded landings for every surface item and all nine dimensions). Not 5: there is no explicit post-write verification of the artifact — e.g. a final step re-reading the task to confirm every landing is filled — the sweep's recording mechanism implies it but never states it. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | One reference, references/document-format.md, exists and is well-signaled with explicit load timing ('Read references/document-format.md when you write the .tasks/<name>.md artifact — after the cut, the grounding, the surface walk, and the sweep. Do not load it during Cut.') and a one-level-deep structure. Not 5: the SKILL.md body itself is long and monolithic — material such as the question-shaping etiquette and the Common failures catalogue arguably belongs in a second reference file, keeping the overview lean. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |