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 body is a genuinely executable, well-sequenced operational skill with strong error handling and concrete commands. Its main weakness is redundancy — duplicated resolution logic and overlapping output templates — plus a pseudocode wiki-ingest block and an unspecified retry behavior.
Suggestions
Remove the duplicated tool-resolution shell cascade: it is inlined in both Step 2 and Step 7 while already being delegated to shared-references/integration-contract.md — state the policy once and reference the contract instead of re-inlining the fallback chain.
Merge Step 5's table template and Step 6's detailed summary into a single output template to eliminate near-duplicate formatting instructions, and fold the 'Recommended filter combos' table into DEFAULT_FILTERS since it repeats those flags.
Make the rate-limit rule concrete and the Step 7 wiki block executable: specify the 429 behavior (e.g., 'wait 10s, retry once, then surface the error') and replace the pseudocode 'for each paper' loop with an actual bash loop or a precise per-paper command list.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly operational rather than explanatory, but contains real duplication and padding: the ~15-line fetcher-resolution shell cascade is inlined in both Step 2 and Step 7, Step 5's table format and Step 6's detailed summary overlap, the 'Recommended filter combos' table repeats DEFAULT_FILTERS, and 'Role & Positioning' plus 'Key Rules' restate content from the Workflow steps. Fits anchor 3 ('mostly efficient... could be tightened') better than anchor 4, where over-explanation would be only minor. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Steps 2-3 give copy-paste-ready commands with concrete flags ('--fields-of-study "Computer Science,Engineering" --publication-types JournalArticle,Conference'). Not anchor 5 because the Step 7 wiki block mixes bash with non-executable pseudocode ('for each paper in results: if paper.externalIds.ArXiv:'), and the promised inline-Python fallback is named but never shown. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 8-step sequence from argument parsing to final output, with ID-pattern rules for skipping search, a dedup checkpoint (Step 4), and error paths for 429s, unreachable API, missing fetcher, and missing wiki script (warn-and-skip with remediation hint). Not anchor 5 because the rate-limit guidance 'wait and retry' gives no concrete wait duration or retry limit. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good structure with clear section headers and well-signaled one-level-deep links to shared-references/integration-contract.md and wiki-helper-resolution.md (these live outside the skill bundle and could not be verified to exist). All content the skill itself needs is inline in an organized 237-line body; the main gap is that the fetcher-resolution shell cascade is inlined twice rather than kept in the referenced contract file, which is a minor organization issue rather than the structural problem of anchor 3. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |