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 content is a well-sequenced, actionable workflow with a strong sub-agent prompt template. Its main weakness is redundancy: the Evaluation Criteria section duplicates the comparison criteria, and there is no explicit validation step for sub-agent outputs.
Suggestions
Delete the 'Evaluation Criteria' section (or fold its two unique points — deep-vs-shallow module framing and the over-generalization caveat — into the 'Compare Designs' step) to remove the near-verbatim duplication of the comparison criteria.
Replace the vague 'Don't let sub-agents produce similar designs - enforce radical difference' with a concrete checkpoint, e.g., after generation, verify each design has a different primary trade-off before presenting; regenerate any that overlap.
Name the actual sub-agent tool used by the harness (e.g., 'Agent tool' instead of 'Task tool') so the instruction is directly executable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean (checklist, prompt template, criteria lists), but the "Evaluation Criteria" section repeats interface simplicity, general-purpose, implementation efficiency, and depth nearly verbatim from the "Compare Designs" step, and re-explains deep-vs-shallow modules. This fits the 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened' anchor rather than the minor-trimming anchor 4. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The sub-agent prompt template with per-agent constraint assignments ("Agent 1: 'Minimize method count...'") and a specified output format is concrete and near copy-paste ready, and the requirements checklist gives executable questions. Minor gaps (references a "Task tool" that may not match the harness, placeholders left undefined) keep it below the fully-executable anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The five steps (gather, generate, present, compare, synthesize) are clearly sequenced, with the synthesize step acting as a user feedback loop and the anti-patterns section guarding failure modes. However, there is no checkpoint verifying the outputs (e.g., how to actually enforce that sub-agent designs are radically different), so it sits at 'most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps' rather than anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A single self-contained file with clear section headers and no nested references, so navigation is easy. The skill is ~94 lines (above the under-50-line simple-skill exception), and the duplicated comparison/evaluation criteria could be consolidated, which fits the 'good structure; minor organization gaps' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |