Content
93%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.
A tight, actionable workflow document: executable commands, a real externalized script, an explicit human-in-the-loop gate, and disciplined reject/keep criteria. The only gap is a missing append-verification/feedback loop on the backlog save, which keeps workflow clarity just below full marks.
Suggestions
Add an explicit verification step after appending to backlog/ideas.json (e.g., re-read the file to confirm the new entry landed and its JSON is valid) to turn the save into a validate→retry loop and lift workflow_clarity to 5.
Make the shortlist table's expected output explicit (a concrete 2–3 row example with the columns filled) so Step 2's deliverable is unambiguous beyond the header row.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean prose that assumes Claude's competence; the only explanatory passage (reading each platform's embedded JSON instead of scraping) is the genuinely non-obvious method, not basic-concept padding. Every section earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable, copy-paste-ready bash invoking the real scripts/find_viral.py with concrete flags and thresholds, plus a concrete JSON backlog-entry template; examples cover both the EN and RU cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear Step 1 → Step 2 → Gate → Step 3 sequence with an explicit user-pick checkpoint and a reject-on-sight checklist, but no verification that the backlog append succeeded and no error-recovery feedback loop, which the anchor-5 calls for. It is above a 3 because the gate is a genuine validation checkpoint. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized sections with a clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference to scripts/find_viral.py (a verified real file holding implementation detail); no nested references, and no bulk content inlined that belongs in a separate file. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |