Content
86%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 a tight, well-structured instruction lens with no padding and clear scope/threshold/reporting sections. It is actionable and well-sequenced, falling just short of full marks only on the absence of a worked defect example and explicit validation loops.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — 'A skill is executable instruction. An agent reads it and acts, with no author to ask.' — with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, executable procedure ('Start from what the change asserts, then find every other place the same skill speaks about it') and a specific reporting format, but lacks a worked example of an actual defect, leaving a minor gap versus fully copy-paste-ready guidance. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Method section lays out a clear ordered sequence (assertions → cross-references → follow as agent → check each step) and the Threshold section acts as a report/don't-report decision checklist, but there are no explicit validation feedback loops, fitting the 4 anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no bundle files and no need for external references, the body is well-organized into clearly labeled sections (Scope, Method, Threshold, Reporting), meeting the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |