Review the target as a portable Agent Skills artifact when possible. If the target is only a skill-like instruction document, still review it and separately call out packaging gaps against the Agent Skills format.

Produce a concrete review that:

Load before writing the review. Load before writing the final report.

Use both review methodologies every time:

Do not inflate severity. Prefer fewer, sharper findings over long weak lists.

Every finding must include:

Prefer embedding the location directly into the sentence, for example by naming the file, line number, and a short quoted phrase from the reviewed text. Do not hide all location detail at the end of the bullet. Never quote or reproduce secrets, credentials, tokens, API keys, passwords, private keys, or other sensitive values from the reviewed material. If a finding depends on sensitive content, describe it generically and redact the value, for example or .

If the target lacks file structure, cite the best available location description and say that exact line references are unavailable.

Always evaluate each pattern explicitly:

The pattern assessment may appear inside , but it must show an explicit result for all five patterns, such as , , or . If a pattern applies, recommend it directly in the review rather than leaving the implication implicit.

Ask these questions during review:

Your final output must match . Do not replace the requested sections with a different structure. Write findings in natural prose. Explain impact directly instead of using the literal label . When citing reviewed content, prefer short non-sensitive phrases. Redact any sensitive material instead of quoting it.