Content
67%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.
The skill body is a well-structured, actionable workflow with clear sequencing and a review feedback loop. Its main weakness is duplicated venue/page-count guidance that adds tokens without adding information.
Suggestions
Consolidate the MAX_PAGES / venue page-count rules that appear in both Constants and Key Rules into a single authoritative location to reduce redundancy.
Move the detailed per-venue page-count table and citation package rules into a referenced file (e.g. venue-checklists.md) and keep only a one-line pointer in SKILL.md.
Tighten Step 1's long inline branching on the assurance contract by summarizing the branch logic and pointing to shared-references/assurance-contract.md for full detail.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly task-relevant but repeats venue page-count and MAX_PAGES rules in both Constants and Key Rules, and could be tightened by consolidating that duplicated guidance. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete templates (Claims-Evidence Matrix, section-by-section plans, Figure Plan, Citation Plan, and a spawn_agent block) that are directly usable, with only minor placeholder gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 7-step sequence includes a validation branch in Step 1 (verdict: REVIEW_UNAVAILABLE) and a feedback loop in Step 6 (reviewer model → apply feedback), with minor checkpoint gaps elsewhere. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-sectioned and points to one-level-deep shared references (writing-principles.md, venue-checklists.md) that are clearly signaled, though some inlined venue/citation detail could be split out. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |