Content
78%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 body is a well-structured, largely executable guide with good progressive disclosure and a concrete worked example. Its weakest point is the PR-gate step, which depends on an unshipped and undefined `scripts/i18n-scan.sh` and never explains how "new" untranslated strings are detected against a baseline.
Suggestions
Ship or inline the contents of `scripts/i18n-scan.sh` referenced in Step 5, including how it identifies strings that are new in a PR (e.g., diffing scan output against the base branch or a committed baseline) rather than all unwrapped strings.
Promote the validate→fix→retry loop from the worked example into the Step 5 instructions as an explicit checkpoint sequence, so the gating workflow's error-recovery path is in the step list itself.
Trim known-concept explanation in Step 6 (the RTL language list and the bidi rendering rationale) to the flagging criteria and the W3C link.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and efficient — stack/tool tables, a compact Python script, and tight Limitations and Anti-patterns sections — with only minor over-explanation, e.g., listing RTL languages ("Arabic, Hebrew, Persian, Urdu") and explaining bidi rendering, both of which Claude already knows. It fits the efficient-with-minor-trims anchor; not 5 because of those few explainer sentences, not 3 because padding is incidental. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Mostly executable guidance: a runnable grep, a complete copy-paste Python coverage script, and a concrete GitHub Actions gate snippet. The main gap is that Step 5 invokes `./scripts/i18n-scan.sh`, which is neither defined in the body nor shipped in the bundle, and how it distinguishes new untranslated strings from existing ones is unspecified. This fits concrete-code-with-minor-gaps rather than the fully copy-paste-ready top anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1–6 are clearly sequenced, summarized in "How to use", and tied together by a worked example that closes the loop (gate fails → wrap text → re-run → gate passes). The validate→fix→retry loop lives in the example rather than in the step sequence itself, and the gate's detection mechanics are underspecified, so it sits just below the explicit-checkpoints anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-sectioned with a single one-level-deep reference — [references/coverage-report.md], verified to exist — clearly signaled at its point of use in Step 4, with the full report template appropriately split out of SKILL.md. Structure and navigation match the clear-overview anchor; there is no nested referencing or misplaceed inline content. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |