Content
65%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 clean, well-structured overview that delegates implementation detail to one real reference file, giving strong progressive disclosure. It is weaker on actionability and workflow clarity, since fixes stay high-level and the guidance is organized by mode rather than as a sequenced, validated workflow.
Suggestions
Add one or two concrete code snippets or specific patterns inline (e.g., a setTimeout-based warning dialog, a fetch draft-persistence call) instead of deferring all implementation detail to references/rule.md.
Sequence Check -> Fix -> Explain as explicit numbered steps with a verification checkpoint, e.g., "After fixing, re-test the flow as a keyboard-only user to confirm the warning is announced and state restores."
Collapse the Quick Reference bullets into the Check paragraph (or vice versa) to remove the redundancy and reclaim token budget.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and well sectioned, but the Quick Reference bullets largely restate the Check paragraph, and the Explain section restates WCAG alignment Claude already knows. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete review checklist items appear ("Verify users are told the timeout duration, warned before expiry..."), but the Fix guidance is high-level ("Add an accessible timeout warning") with all code and examples deferred to references/rule.md. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Sections are organized by mode (Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review) rather than as a sequenced workflow, and there are no explicit validation or verification checkpoints. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A concise overview in SKILL.md points via a single well-signaled, one-level-deep pointer ("see `references/rule.md`") to implementation details; the referenced file exists. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |