Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
Strong, actionable skill body with clear workflows, executable code, and well-structured progressive disclosure. The only weakness is moderate verbosity in framing paragraphs that could be tightened without losing clarity.
Suggestions
Tighten the opening paragraph and remove explanations that restate what Claude already knows about plugins and rubrics to improve conciseness.
Consider moving the 'Common problems' table to a reference file if the main body needs to be shorter.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is ~275 lines with generally efficient content, but includes some unnecessary framing (e.g., explaining what a reviewer plugin is, restating that schemas should not be modified). The tables and code blocks earn their space, but several paragraphs could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides executable bash commands for every step, complete JSON templates for rubric files and config, specific file paths, and a concrete validation command with expected output fields. Copy-paste ready throughout. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 6-step process with two well-differentiated paths (Fork vs Scratch). Step 6 is an explicit validation checkpoint with expected output. The 'Common problems' table provides error recovery. The weight invariant is stated and reinforced at each relevant step. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized sections with the main skill as overview. Default rubric files are correctly referenced in references/default-rubric/ (verified to exist). Schemas are in references/schemas/. The reviewer-SKILL.md is a separate reference file. No deeply nested references; all one level deep. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |