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.
The body is a well-sequenced, highly actionable workflow with explicit validation and failure-handling checkpoints, leaning on executable shell snippets. Its main weakness is progressive_disclosure: the body references multiple scripts and a schema file that are not actually present as bundle files, and a few meta-rationale asides add token weight without aiding execution.
Suggestions
Add the referenced scripts (plan-brief-compile.sh, render-html.sh, plan-brief-open.sh, plan-brief-record-decision.sh) and schemas/plan-brief-context.v1.schema.json to the bundle so progressive_disclosure references resolve to real files.
Trim the inline rationale blockquotes (e.g. the 'D43 判断 1 の根拠' and 'Phase 105.3 以降' readiness explanations) or move them to a references doc to improve conciseness.
Move the full plan-brief-context.v1 schema listing out of the body into the referenced schema file, keeping only a short pointer inline, to better separate overview from detail.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient: action-oriented tables, inline code blocks, and tight step descriptions, but some meta-commentary and rationale paragraphs (e.g. the multi-line 'D43 判断 1 の根拠' blockquote and the 'Phase 105.3 以降...' readiness explanation) pad beyond what Claude needs; this is the 4 anchor (efficient, minor over-explanation that could be trimmed), not 5 because those asides do not all earn their tokens. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands throughout: 'PROJECT_NAME="$(basename "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)")"', the full mcp search parameter block, the jq -n context-build snippet, and 'bash scripts/render-html.sh --template plan-brief --data ...'; matches the 5 anchor with specific examples covering common cases; not a 4 because the concrete commands cover the full flow rather than having gaps. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear six-step sequence (resolve project → search → assemble context → render HTML → open → approval) with explicit validation/fallback checkpoints in the 失敗時の挙動 table (mem search unreachable → continue with empty arrays; git fail → default; render fail → exit 1; open fail → best-effort exit 0) and per-step guardrails like 'strict_project: true を必ず指定'; matches the 5 anchor with explicit validation steps and error recovery feedback loops; not a 4 because checkpoints and recovery are explicit, not implicit. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good structure with clear sections and well-signaled one-level-deep references to scripts (plan-brief-compile.sh, render-html.sh, plan-brief-open.sh, plan-brief-record-decision.sh) and the schema file, but no bundle files actually exist in references/scripts/assets, so the referenced scripts are not present as separate files — they are signaled but unverifiable, fitting the 4 anchor (good structure, mostly clear, minor organization gaps) rather than 5 (clear overview with appropriately split content in real referenced files). | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |