what makes an argument good?

Often times, people come up with many arguments that one may question its validity and whether or not it is convincing enough to accept. According to Epstein, in order for an argument to be considered valid and/or legitimate, it must exceed 3 tests. Firstly, it is essential for the principle of the argument to be reasonable; it has to be possible for it to be true. Next, it must be more plausible than the conclusion and has to give a more superior explanation as to why it is more likely for it to be correct. Although the conclusion might not actually be true, it is important that the foundation of it is more realistic and convincing than the end statement for it to be a good argument. Lastly, it is critical to identify whether an argument is considered strong or valid. A strong argument is when it is possible for the conclusion to be false even when the premises of the original idea are true, whereas a valid argument is when both the premise and the conclusion are true.
For example, one might claim the following argument: She went ice-skating. She fell down. She is bad at ice-skating. The first statements may be true because it is definitely a possibility that she went ice-skating and fell down. However, if you look at the conclusion that she is bad at ice-skating, it is not legitimate because you do not know the circumstances as to why she fell. Perhaps the ice has just been cleaned and is more slippery and watery than usual. Maybe her friend tripped her and caused her to slip. It is also possible that the blade under her ice skate had been scratched up and therefore made her balance unstable and wobbly. Whatever the situation, the above statement would not be considered a good argument.