Content
100%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, executable, well-sequenced workflow with validation checkpoints for its destructive/batch CRM writes and clear single-level external referencing. It assumes Claude's intelligence and every token earns its place.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient throughout — it assumes Claude's competence, never explains CRM/CRM-record concepts, and every line carries instruction (e.g. 'No em dashes. Use a colon or a comma', 'Use the partner's slug field, not their display name'). No padding. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete and executable: exact record shapes '{ opportunityId, partnerId, state: "INVITED" }', field-resolution paths 'persons → emails.primaryEmail', file-name conventions, exact subject prefixes, and a sign-off block — all copy-paste ready for the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Four phases are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops: empty designDocUrl stops and asks; existing Application is left alone to avoid duplicates; writes happen before emails so failures surface first; Applications are read back to verify; already-stamped introSentAt prompts a confirm-before-overwrite. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured sections and a single clearly-signaled one-level-deep reference ('Credentials, the gql() helper and every query live in ../_shared/partner-api.md'); no bundle files ship with the skill, so nothing is inlined that belongs elsewhere. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 20 / 20 Passed |