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 well-structured, concise review skill body that clearly separates overview guidance from a verified one-level reference file. The Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sequence is coherent and the detection criteria are concrete.
Suggestions
Trim the introductory motivational paragraph ("Shipping incorrect plurals signals low translation quality...") since Claude already knows why correct plurals matter.
Add one small inline Intl.PluralRules or ICU MessageFormat example in the Fix section so the core remedy is visible without opening the reference.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean with organized sections (Quick Reference, Check, Fix, Explain, Code Review); the two-sentence intro on why plurals matter is mild motivational padding that could be trimmed but is not severe. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Check and Code Review give concrete, specific detection criteria ("strings that concatenate a number with text", "ternary that picks only between singular and plural"), with executable code offloaded to the reference rather than inline. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review sections form a clear, coherent sequence for a review skill; no explicit validation checkpoint is needed since this is not a destructive or batch operation. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview organized into clear sections, with a single well-signaled one-level-deep pointer to the real references/rule.md file (which exists), matching the 5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |