critique-toy
SolidReviews short markdown field-operations notices, memos, and similar prose documents against the toy TOY-* grammar, covering a passive-voice recast that deletes the actor, a hedging phrase stacked ahead of an otherwise direct statement, and a subheading left with no body before the next heading of equal or higher level. Use when the user asks for a review, feedback, a second opinion, a red-line pass, or a quality check on one of this fixture's worked-example documents. This is the skill template's own committed fixture, not a shipped critique-family skill, and it is never registered in library.json.
Install
Quality Score: 80/100
Skill Content
Details
- Author
- product-on-purpose
- Repository
- product-on-purpose/critique-skills
- Created
- 3 weeks ago
- Last Updated
- 4 days ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- Apache-2.0
Similar Skills
Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category
critique-clarity
Reviews markdown or plain-text prose for clarity against the Federal Plain Language Guidelines and Williams' Style: readability, passive voice, sentence length, and nominalization density. Judges sentence- and passage-level readability, not whether an argument's claim is supported or its structure holds together (critique-argument covers that). Use when the user asks for feedback, a second opinion, a red-line pass, or a quality check on a memo, PRD, proposal, or any prose document before it goes out.
critique-docs
Reviews technical documentation pages and page trees written in markdown against the Diataxis framework: tutorial, how-to, reference, and explanation mode fit, plus heading structure, orphaned pages, cross-mode linking, and navigation-list length. Use when the user asks for a review, feedback, a second opinion, a red-line pass, or a quality check on a docs site, a README tree, a knowledge base, or any markdown documentation before it ships.
critique-argument
Reviews argumentative prose - essays, proposals, position papers, recommendation memos, strategy docs, and op-eds - against the Toulmin model of argument: whether the claim, grounds, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal are present, explicit, and actually hold together. Judges the argument's structure, not prose readability or sentence mechanics (critique-clarity covers that). Use when the user asks for a review, feedback, a second opinion, a red-line pass, a quality check, or a critique of whether an argument holds up before it goes out.