Content
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is exceptionally concise and well-organized for a simple instruction skill, with concrete codebase anchors and clear stop conditions. Its main gaps are the absence of an explicit error-recovery feedback loop and only one fully executable command.
Suggestions
Add a feedback loop after the validation step, e.g. "If `make verify` fails, fix the reported issues and re-run before proceeding."
Make the testing step more executable by naming the test command or pattern (e.g. `go test ./<changed-package>/...`) instead of the generic "Run targeted tests first."
Optionally specify how to locate the relevant Go package or source connector so the smallest-change step is more concrete.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean (six short instruction lines plus two stop conditions) with no concept explanation or filler; every line is actionable and assumes Claude's competence, matching the level-3 anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, codebase-specific guidance ("Go package boundaries", "source connector patterns", "make verify") but beyond the single make target the steps are high-level directives rather than fully executable, copy-paste-ready instructions. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly sequenced (1-6) with a validation checkpoint ("Run targeted tests first, then make verify"), but there is no feedback loop describing what to do when verification fails, so it stops short of level 3. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, and has no external references; it is well-organized into Instructions and Stop Conditions sections, which earns a 3 under the simple-skills guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |