Content
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A concise, well-structured single-purpose workflow with concrete commands for the early steps. It is held back by an unspecified lint/typecheck command and an implicit rather than explicit validate-fix-rerun loop.
Suggestions
Give step 5 a concrete invocation or a discovery command (e.g., the package's lint/typecheck script path) instead of the bare instruction 'Run lint and typecheck'.
Add an explicit validation loop to step 6: 'After fixing, re-run lint and typecheck; repeat until no violations remain.'
Clarify how the affected package's lint/typecheck command is found (e.g., read from the spec index or package config) so the step is executable rather than descriptive.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient: each step is a concrete instruction with no padding, and the 'The index is NOT the goal' note earns its place as useful anti-pattern guidance rather than fluff. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Steps 1-3 give copy-paste-ready commands, but step 5 ('Run lint and typecheck for the affected package') specifies no command and step 6 ('Report any violations and fix them') is generic, leaving key execution details missing. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The numbered sequence is clear and concrete, but step 6 lacks an explicit re-verification checkpoint ('fix then re-run lint/typecheck until clean'), so the validation feedback loop is implicit rather than a stated checkpoint. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A self-contained skill under 50 lines with no external bundle files, organized into well-signaled numbered steps; per the simple-skills note this warrants a 3 without separate reference files. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |