Content
72%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-structured guardrails checklist for report rendering that assumes Claude's competence and stays lean. It is weakest on actionability and workflow clarity because it specifies what to check and preserve without executable methods or a validate-fix-retry feedback loop.
Suggestions
Add concrete execution detail to steps 3 and 5: name the deterministic templates or tooling used to render, and specify which structural/visual checks to run (e.g., link integrity, layout overflow) so the guidance is executable rather than descriptive.
Add a feedback loop after step 5: if structural or visual/layout checks fail, fix the template/data and re-run checks before writing, to satisfy the batch-operation validation requirement and lift workflow clarity above 3.
Optionally point to where canonical data and templates live (e.g., a path or manifest field) so step 3's "same canonical data and deterministic templates" is actionable rather than abstract.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~20-line body is lean and directive with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line (numbered steps and the constraints paragraph) earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Steps enumerate concrete items to confirm and preserve (privacy class, evidence references, contradictions, owners, measurement windows), but "Run structural checks, then visual/layout checks" and "Render all formats from... deterministic templates" give no executable method, commands, or template names, leaving key details missing. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear six-step sequence with an explicit validation checkpoint (step 5: structural then visual/layout checks), but this batch render operation lacks a feedback loop (what to do when checks fail), which caps workflow clarity at 3 per the batch-operation guideline. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, single-purpose, with no bundle files and no need for external references; the well-organized numbered list plus separated constraints section satisfies the simple-skill progressive-disclosure exception. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |