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.
The content is a lean, well-organized overview with concrete attribute-level review guidance and clean progressive disclosure to a single reference file. Its main weakness is mild redundancy between the Quick Reference and Check/Fix sections and the lack of an explicit re-verify feedback loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is short, well-sectioned, and avoids re-teaching ARIA basics, but the opening motivation sentence and overlap between Quick Reference and the Check/Fix sections are minor tokens that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Gives concrete, attribute-level guidance (aria-label='Pagination', aria-current='page', focusable controls) and tells reviewers exactly what to flag; inline executable code is deferred to the reference, which is appropriate for a review skill. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections form a clear review workflow with the Check section acting as the verification checkpoint, though it is a section layout rather than an explicitly numbered sequence with a re-verify loop. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview that clearly signals a single one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md') for full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance; the referenced file exists. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |