Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a lean, actionable, well-sequenced operational guide with explicit validation and one-level-deep references; its only weakness is an inline time-sensitive date that the rubric penalizes for conciseness. Otherwise it is strong across actionability, workflow clarity, and progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
Move or remove the inline time-sensitive phrase "as of mid-2026" (and the Fable-5-above-Opus assertion) into a clearly labeled "current as of" / deprecated-style note, or replace it with an instruction to always look up the current frontier, so conciseness is not dinged for a hardcoded date.
Add a per-job validation callout (e.g., re-run the pytest loader after Job 1's regeneration and after Job 3's metadata edits) so each workflow step has its own checkpoint rather than relying on a single centralized Validate section.
Consider linking the design docs as markdown references (e.g., See [design.md](...)) in addition to the bare path so the one-level-deep references are even more clearly signaled for navigation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and assumes Claude's competence with no padded concept explanations, but it embeds an inline time-sensitive phrase — "the Anthropic frontier is Fable 5, above Opus, as of mid-2026" — which the guideline says should penalize conciseness unless placed in a deprecated/old-patterns section; it is not level 3 because of that date, and not level 1 because there is no verbose explanation of concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Job 1 provides a fully executable bash command with glob resolution and the node invocation, and the Validate section gives a copy-paste pytest command; Jobs 2 and 3 give concrete, actionable guidance (publish claude-fable-5, avoid fable/fable[1m], validate the 1-5 range) with the absence of code explicitly justified by the live-session requirement — matching the fully executable/specific anchor; not level 2 because the guidance is complete rather than pseudocode or missing key details. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The three jobs are clearly numbered and sequenced, with a dedicated Validate section that includes an explicit command and a feedback loop ("fails loud there... publishes an empty catalog rather than crashing /inspect") plus a "When to run" checklist; validation is present for the data-file rewrite so there is no cap at 2, and it is not level 2 because checkpoints and error recovery are explicit rather than implicit. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle directories are provided, so this is scored on body organization: the content is well sectioned (~85 lines) with one-level-deep, clearly signaled references (design.md/plan.md in the rationale line, generate_pi_models.mjs for the generator); matches the clear-overview-with-well-signaled-references anchor and is not level 2 because references are not nested or poorly signaled. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |