Content
96%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 dense, highly operational skill body: exact commands, verbatim reviewer prompts, explicit validation gates, and baked-in lessons-learned conventions make it fully executable. The only room for improvement is minor trimming of anecdotal sections and optionally moving the large inline prompt/JSON templates into reference files.
Suggestions
Trim the Provenance section and the Video Generation tutorial anecdote in Step 4 to one or two sentences — they add history, not execution guidance.
Move the verbatim Step-3 reviewer prompt and the Step-6 audit-JSON skeleton into a references/ file (e.g. references/reviewer-prompt.md and references/audit-format.json), keeping only invocation notes inline, to slim the main body and ease maintenance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is operational throughout — style-rule tables with reasons, exact commands, verbatim reviewer prompts — with almost no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Not 5: minor trims are possible, e.g. the Provenance section and the "Video Generation tutorial (May 2026) went to 5 rounds" anecdote add narrative that isn't strictly needed to execute. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Everything is copy-paste ready: the exact `python3 skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py ...` command with all flags, the full verbatim reviewer prompt with 10 named checks and a JSON return contract, the exact audit-trail JSON schema, and a literal final report template. Not below 5: concrete examples (good/bad topics, slug mapping, reference invocations) cover the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Seven clearly sequenced steps (plan → draft → fresh review → fix loop → render → combine audit → stop/report) with explicit PASS/WARN/FAIL validation gates, a fix-and-re-review feedback loop with concrete keep-going/stop heuristics, a render-stage re-check, and a detect-only commit policy. Not below 5: validation checkpoints and error-recovery loops are explicit at every stage. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-sectioned single-file skill; external references (docs/tutorials/attention_tutorial.md as canonical style, ../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md) are one level deep and clearly signaled. Not 5: no bundle files exist, and sizable always-used templates (the ~30-line reviewer prompt, the audit-JSON skeleton) are fully inline; these are defensible inline but could live in a references/ file to slim the main body. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |