Content
92%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 tight, highly actionable skill body with executable commands, explicit error handling, and clean progressive disclosure. The only nit is mild restatement of the no-extra-findings rule across multiple sections.
Suggestions
Consolidate the 'add no finding the tool did not emit' rule so it is stated once authoritatively (Rules) and only referenced elsewhere, trimming the redundancy between Rules, Workflow step 4, and Output section 5.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean with no concept explanations and every section earning its place, but the core constraint 'add no finding the tool did not emit' is restated across Rules, Workflow, and Output — minor redundancy that could be trimmed, fitting the 4 anchor rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable: exact command syntax with flags, documented exit codes, verbatim error strings, a grep one-liner for locating entry files, and a concrete output template — copy-paste ready and covering common cases including failure. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The single-tool workflow is unambiguous — run JSON then MD, write the specified output, and on error print verbatim and stop — with an explicit error path and a reviewer checklist template, meeting the simple-skill bar for a 5. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized sections with a clearly signaled one-level-deep Reference list pointing to docs/corpus-review.md and docs/corpus-authoring.md; core operational detail stays inline while the deep material (ledger, drift, predicate grammar, versioning) is referenced. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |