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 executable counting examples and RuboCop config and a clear sequenced workflow, but it is let down by verbosity and by duplicating content that also lives in references/rules.md instead of acting as a lean overview.
Suggestions
Trim the restated four rules and the design-concept explanations (SRP, pattern names) from the body, since they are covered in references/rules.md; keep the body a lean overview that points to the reference for rationale.
Remove or collapse the closing 'Resources' section, which restates the reference's contents — a single 'Read references/rules.md for detailed guidance' call already covers it.
Move the refactoring-strategy bullet lists (which duplicate rules.md) into the reference, leaving the body to focus on its unique content: counting rules, priority thresholds, RuboCop config, and the workflow.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly actionable but padded: it restates the four rules already in the description, explains design concepts Claude knows ('Single Responsibility Principle', 'Strategy, Decorator, Command, Facade'), and the closing 'Resources' section restates the reference rather than deferring. Not a 1 because counting rules and RuboCop config earn their place; not a 3 because of the redundancy and known-concept explanations. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides executable Ruby counting examples, concrete parameter-counting signatures, and a copy-paste-ready RuboCop YAML config, meeting the 'fully executable code/commands; copy-paste ready' anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced 5-step Code Review Workflow plus three numbered Usage Patterns, and the refactoring pattern includes an explicit validation step ('Verify that tests still pass'). Code review is non-destructive, so the missing-checkpoint cap does not apply. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are well-signaled and one-level-deep (explicit 'Read references/rules.md' blocks pointing to a real file), but the four rules, refactoring strategies, and breaking-rules context are duplicated inline rather than split into the reference, matching the 'content that should be separate is inline' part of the 2 anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |