Content
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is highly actionable with a well-sequenced, validated workflow, but it pays a conciseness cost from duplicated powershell/bash blocks and keeps material inline that could be offloaded to references.
Suggestions
Collapse the parallel powershell and bash blocks into a single command per step (or a tabbed/conditional form) to remove roughly half the code-block tokens.
Move the lengthy sync/async sample-generation examples and region/snippet conventions into a references file (e.g. references/samples.md) and link to it from the Sample generation section.
Tighten the EPERM handling so the relationship between step 3 and step 4 is explicit, removing ambiguity about which command to run when recovery is needed.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly command-driven and assumes Claude's competence, but every command is duplicated in near-identical powershell and bash blocks, roughly doubling token cost, so it lands at 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than lean level 3. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It provides exact file paths, concrete dotnet/npm/gh commands, and copy-paste-ready snippets with explicit parameter substitution, matching the 'fully executable, copy-paste ready' anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The multi-step process is numbered and sectioned with explicit validation checkpoints (compile checks, 'make sure all projects build without errors') and a feedback loop for the EPERM error, satisfying the clear-sequence-with-validation anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | There is one clearly signaled one-level reference (references/customization.md), but the long inline sample-generation examples and dual shell blocks are content that could be split into references, matching the 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline' anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |