Content
80%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is concise and highly actionable with concrete XML templates and styles, but workflow clarity is capped by a missing XML validation/feedback loop and the two referenced detail files do not exist in the bundle.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation checkpoint (e.g., open the generated .drawio in Draw.io or run an XML well-formedness check, then fix-and-retry) given the skill's emphasis on XML correctness.
Create the referenced reference/style-migration.md and reference/generation.md files (or remove the dangling references) so the routing table resolves to real content.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and organized — concrete XML skeleton, exact style strings, and escape rules with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; not level 2 because there is little that could be cut without losing useful detail. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready guidance: a complete mxfile/mxGraphModel skeleton, exact style strings for 2D/3D nodes and edges, and explicit escaping rules — fully executable rather than abstract. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A Step 0 routing table sequences mode selection, but there is no validate/retry checkpoint for the emphasized XML correctness, and the rubric caps XML-manipulation workflows at 2 when feedback loops are missing; not 3 for that reason, not 1 because a sequence does exist. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The overview correctly points to one-level-deep references (reference/style-migration.md, reference/generation.md), but those files do not exist in the bundle, so the references are broken; not 1 because structure is clean and shallow, not 3 because the referenced detail files are absent. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |