Content
78%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 strong, well-structured skill body: an actionable eight-step workflow with executable snippets, real one-level-deep references, and useful anti-patterns/limitations sections. The main refinements are tightening the quoted Overview material, adding the Ruby step-definition coverage and JS imports the three-implementation scope promises, and surfacing the first-run 'undefined steps are expected' validation cue in the main run step.
Suggestions
Collapse the two cucumber.io block quotes in the Overview into a single sentence ('Official implementations: JavaScript, Java, Ruby, Android, Kotlin, Scala, C++; semi-official: Behat, Behave, Reqnroll — per cucumber.io/docs/installation') to save tokens without losing the scoping rationale.
Add a Ruby step-definition example (or a pointer to one) in references/step-definitions-and-reporting.md — Ruby is one of the three covered implementations but currently has no step-binding example, and import the `assert` module in the JS example so it is truly copy-paste runnable.
In the Step 6 'Run' section, add one line stating the expected first-run result (undefined steps with printed snippets are the correct outcome, not a failure), since this validation cue is currently buried in references/runner-selection.md.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean: eight numbered steps each carry code or a table, with no tutorial prose explaining what BDD or Maven is. The Overview's two block quotes from cucumber.io ("Cucumber is available for most mainstream programming languages" and the tiers list) partially restate the sentence that follows them and could be collapsed into one line, which keeps this below anchor 5 but well above anchor 3. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Install snippets, a complete `.feature` file, JS step definitions with `{cucumber-expression}` captures, run commands, and tag-filtering commands are copy-paste ready, and Java details are correctly deferred to the reference. Minor gaps hold it at 4: the inline JS example uses `assert` and `createLoggedInUser()` without imports, and Cucumber-Ruby — one of the three covered implementations — never gets a step-definition example (the reference file only contains JVM and JS). | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1–8 form a coherent, correctly ordered sequence (install → author feature → bind steps → run → report → filter), and the anti-patterns and limitations sections reinforce it. However, checkpoints are implicit rather than explicit: the crucial 'undefined steps on first run is the correct result, not a failure' validation signal lives in references/runner-selection.md instead of the run step, and the body has no 'verify what success looks like' note. Test-running is not destructive/batch, so the ≤3 cap does not apply. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Both referenced files (references/runner-selection.md, references/step-definitions-and-reporting.md) exist, are one level deep, and are well signaled in context ('Full Java... plus the JUnit XML reporting config, are in...') and again in the References section. Heavy detail (Java step defs, reporting config, runner decision table) is correctly split out while the overview stays self-sufficient for the happy path. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |