Content
72%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, well-organized, and appropriately uses a single shallow reference file. It is held back by actionability and workflow clarity: the extraction step stays descriptive and there are no validation checkpoints confirming the read or extraction before moving on.
Suggestions
Add a concrete extraction/check step after `read OBJ`, e.g. verify the output contains explicit 'To make...' / 'Required:' style lines before parsing, and re-read or report if it is blank.
Tighten the Example into copy-paste-ready form by showing the exact parse pattern (goal/components/procedure) applied directly to the quoted recipe output rather than restating it as prose.
Reference action_primer.md by name from within the body (e.g. in the 'Plan Next Actions' step) so the one-level-deep navigation is explicitly signaled.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and efficient with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section (Purpose, When to Use, Workflow, Example) earns its place and assumes competence. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete commands such as `read OBJ`, `pick up recipe`, and `read recipe in inventory`, but the extraction guidance is procedural description rather than fully executable, copy-paste-ready instruction. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear three-step sequence (read, extract, plan) is present, but there are no validation/verification checkpoints to confirm the read succeeded or that extraction was complete before proceeding. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | As a short, single-purpose skill under 50 lines, it is well-organized into clear sections with one real one-level-deep reference (references/action_primer.md); structure is clean and easy to navigate. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |