Evaluate and improve how information is organized for findability. Use when the user asks to "organize this", "restructure docs", "improve navigation", "where should this go", "review file structure", struggles to place content, or when documentation grows beyond a single page.
86
83%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
82%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a solid description with excellent trigger term coverage and complete what/when guidance. The main weakness is that the capability description is somewhat abstract ('evaluate and improve how information is organized') rather than listing concrete actions the skill performs. The distinctiveness could be improved by emphasizing unique aspects like information architecture or taxonomy design.
Suggestions
Add 2-3 specific concrete actions to improve specificity, e.g., 'Evaluate and improve information architecture: create folder hierarchies, design navigation structures, audit content placement for findability.'
Consider adding more distinctive terminology like 'information architecture', 'taxonomy', or 'content hierarchy' to reduce potential overlap with general file/document management skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (information organization/findability) and mentions some actions like 'organize', 'restructure', 'improve navigation', but lacks concrete specific actions like 'create folder hierarchies', 'generate navigation menus', or 'audit link structures'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Evaluate and improve how information is organized for findability') and when ('Use when the user asks to...' with explicit trigger phrases and situational triggers like 'struggles to place content' or 'documentation grows beyond a single page'). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural user phrases: 'organize this', 'restructure docs', 'improve navigation', 'where should this go', 'review file structure'. These are realistic terms users would actually say when needing this skill. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While it has specific triggers around organization and navigation, terms like 'organize this' and 'restructure docs' could potentially overlap with general file management or documentation writing skills. The focus on 'findability' helps distinguish it somewhat. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured, actionable skill that provides clear workflows and concrete guidance for information architecture tasks. Its main weakness is some verbosity in foundational explanations that Claude doesn't need. The review workflow, decision tree, and common patterns sections are particularly strong and immediately usable.
Suggestions
Trim the Overview and 'The Four Systems' introductory text—Claude knows what IA is; jump straight to the actionable evaluation criteria
Consider moving the Diataxis table to a reference file since it's standard framework knowledge, keeping only the key insight about single-mode pages
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is mostly efficient but includes some explanatory material Claude likely knows (e.g., basic definitions of IA, what Diataxis is). The four systems section could be tightened, and some bullet points are somewhat verbose. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, actionable guidance throughout: specific evaluation questions, a structured review workflow, a decision tree for placement, and a clear output format template for recommendations. The taxonomy construction checklist and review workflow are immediately usable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The three-step review workflow (Map → Evaluate → Recommend) is clearly sequenced with explicit checkpoints. The evaluation questions table and structured output format provide clear validation criteria for each step. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized with clear sections, appropriate use of tables for quick scanning, and one-level-deep references to related skills and external materials. The 'See Also' section provides clear navigation to related content without deep nesting. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
c3b1fc2
Table of Contents
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.