Content
88%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.
An exceptionally actionable, well-sequenced workflow skill: every phase carries executable commands, templates, and checklists, and batch deployment is guarded by sanity checks, code review, and explicit recovery loops. Its only weaknesses are mild — some redundancy in the failure-handling prose and a large inline reviewer prompt that belongs in a reference file.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and directive with no padding of concepts Claude already knows; every phase is commands, tables, or checklists. Minor tightening is possible — e.g., the sanity-failure guidance in Phase 3 spreads over two overlapping paragraphs. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable throughout: exact commands (git clone <BASE_REPO> base_repo/, /run-experiment, /experiment-queue), a complete copy-paste spawn_agent review template, result-file templates, and self-review checklists. Matches anchor 5's copy-paste-ready coverage of common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Phases 1–6 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation for batch operations: sanity-first gate, code review before deployment, a checkpoint when AUTO_DEPLOY = false, and layered error-recovery loops (read logs → fix → re-run, discard and reimplement, second-opinion rescue). Anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist in this skill; shared-references are well-signaled one level deep via markdown links (reviewer-backends.md, output-versioning.md, etc.). Kept at anchor 4 because the ~50-line inline reviewer prompt template and backend lifecycle rules could live in a separate reference file. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |