Content
67%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 concise, well-sequenced process overview that avoids padding and defers platform specifics to external reference files. Its main gap is actionability: the output deliverable (creative brief and copy deck) is never specified concretely, and the validation step lacks a recovery loop.
Suggestions
Specify the deliverable concretely: the filename convention, structure, and number of concepts for the "versioned creative brief and copy deck inside the run directory", so the output is unambiguous without inference.
Add a validation feedback loop: after generating copy, re-check character limits and policy against the loaded spec file and revise the offending lines before returning the brief, rather than stopping at "validate copy limits and policy".
Move the step-6 path-resolution instructions out of the workflow step into a short consistent reference note (e.g., a single resolved base-path convention for all spec files) so the step reads cleanly and all six spec paths share one layout.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The 31-line body is lean, assumes competence, and has no padding, but the inline path-resolution digression in step 6 ("resolve it from the plugin root, the directory that holds `ads/` and `skills/`, or from the skills directory in a standalone install") is wordy and could be trimmed, placing it just below the every-token-earns-its-place anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Steps name concrete inputs and files to load, but key execution details are missing: the "versioned creative brief and copy deck inside the run directory" has no specified format or filename convention, and "materially distinct strategic concepts" gives no count or distinctness criteria, matching the incomplete-guidance anchor rather than the mostly-executable anchor at 4. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 7-step sequence is clearly ordered with embedded checkpoints (claim separation in step 2, cold-start conditionality in step 3, policy validation in step 6), but there is no fix-and-retry recovery loop after the validation step, fitting the most-checkpoints-present anchor rather than the explicit-feedback-loop anchor at 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The short overview appropriately defers detail to clearly signaled, one-level-deep references (`ads/references/*-creative-specs.md`, `skills/ads-meta/SKILL.md`), but none of these files exist in this bundle and the awkward inline path-resolution instruction mixes two path conventions, leaving minor organization gaps versus the clean-navigation anchor at 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |