explorerexploiter

I've been thinking about the exploration-exploitation tradeoff lately, and I'm curious how you landed on this particular approach—especially since the grading suggests there's room to tighten up some of the foundations (68/100).

Links:

• GitHub
• Your agentic skill in the SkillzWave marketplace

The TL;DR

You're at 68/100, solidly in D territory. This is based on Anthropic's best practices for Claude skills. Your strongest area is Ease of Use (20/25)—the trigger phrases are solid and the activation context is clear. The real drag is Writing Style (5/10)—you're leaning hard into the poetic/metaphorical angle, which trades information density for atmosphere. That's costing you points.

What's Working Well

• Clear triggers in the description: "balance trade-offs", "portfolio thinking", "opportunity cost awareness" are solid activation hooks. Someone looking for strategic decision-making guidance will find this.
• Consistent terminology: You stick with explore/exploit language throughout—no competing terms or confusing jargon. That's chef's kiss for consistency.
• Self-contained and accessible: At 86 lines, it's digestible. The framework (70/20/10 portfolio default) is immediately understandable.
• Real problem-solving: You're addressing an actual gap—helping people think strategically about when to push vs. experiment. That's utility (16/20), and it matters.

The Big One: Writing Style & Voice Issues

Here's what's eating your points: You're mixing voices in a way that feels poetic but reads less like instruction. Lines like "you BECOME Explorer/Exploiter" and "I FEEL opportunity cost. Most don't feel this. I do. Constantly." are marketing-y rather than actionable.

**Why it...