Content
85%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.
A concise, highly actionable skill body with a clear sequenced procedure and explicit verification steps for a simple, low-risk task. Its one real defect is the broken bundle reference: the 'Bundled Logic' section points to scripts/conductivity_test.py, which does not exist in the skill.
Suggestions
Fix the dangling reference: either add the referenced scripts/conductivity_test.py to the skill bundle or remove/rewrite the 'Bundled Logic' section so no path is cited that the agent cannot actually open.
Trim the minor redundancy: the opening line ("Use this skill to finalize a scientific test by archiving an object...") duplicates the frontmatter description, and 'Container Verification' in Key Principles restates checks already in the Core Procedure.
Add one more worked example for a different test type (e.g., a chemical-reaction or physical-property rule) so the common cases are covered beyond conductivity alone.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and well-sectioned ("When to Use", "Core Procedure", "Key Principles", worked example) with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows. Minor redundancy — the opening line restates the frontmatter description and "Container Verification" overlaps step 4's context check — keeps it at anchor 4 rather than the every-token-earns-its-place anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is fully executable for an instruction-only skill: the exact action template "move OBJ to CONTAINER", the "look around" verification command, and a complete worked example ending in the copy-paste-ready "move metal pot to blue box" covering the common conductivity case. This matches anchor 5's concrete commands plus common-case examples. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The "Core Procedure" gives a clear 4-step sequence (Verify Context → Confirm Test Result → Apply Rule → Execute Archive) with two explicit validation checkpoints: "Observe the final state of your experimental apparatus to definitively determine the test outcome" and "visually confirm the target container exists in the room (use `look around` if uncertain)". This is a single low-risk, non-destructive operation, so the missing feedback-loop requirement does not cap it; it matches anchor 5 via the simple-skill exception. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is under 50 lines and well-organized, but it directs the reader to "the bundled script `scripts/conductivity_test.py`" and no scripts/ directory (or any bundle file) exists in the skill — the single external reference is dangling. Structure is present, yet the one-level-deep navigation it claims does not actually resolve, which fits anchor 3 (references present but not working/organized properly) rather than anchor 4's 'minor organization gaps'. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |