Content
93%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 an exemplar of lean, actionable, tool-driven guidance with a clear sequence and good organization. The only gap is the absence of explicit validation/feedback checkpoints, which keeps workflow_clarity at 4 rather than 5.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — five terse tool-call steps plus a tight token-budget section — with no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching the score-5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Each step is a concrete, executable tool invocation with real arguments (e.g. query_graph_tool with callers_of/callees_of, get_minimal_context_tool(task="..."), detail_level="minimal"), fully matching the copy-paste-ready score-5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered 1-5 sequence with ordering rules is present, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops; this fits score-4 rather than 5, and the destructive/batch cap does not apply since the workflow is investigative and read-only. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines with no bundle files and no need for external references, and its sections (Debug Issue, Steps, Token Efficiency Rules) are well-organized, satisfying the simple-skill exception for a score of 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |