Content
88%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.
An opinionated, actionable writing guide that assumes competence and sequences the work with an explicit final validation checklist. The only soft spot is mild redundancy where the OpenInference example and Tests/structure guidance recur across sections.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and assumes Claude's competence (no primers on what a PR or GitHub is), but the OpenInference example recurs in both section 3 and the section 9 worked example, and the Tests/structure guidance overlaps across sections 0, 2, and 6 — minor trimming available. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Highly concrete, executable guidance: exact title prefix format with issue-id suffix, a ~70-char limit, a body template with named headings, an explicit before/after shape, a banned marketing-word list, and an absolute 'no em dashes' rule, all reinforced with good/bad examples. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear numbered sequence (title → body → show-don't-restate → cut padding → prose → tests → QA) culminating in section 8's first-30-seconds self-audit checklist with an explicit 'if any answer is no, edit before you push' validation/feedback loop. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into clearly numbered, navigable sections with no external bundle files referenced; appropriately kept as a single cohesive guide, though at ~190 lines it exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill case that would score 5 on sections alone. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |