Content
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is a well-structured, highly actionable mini-sprint workflow with strong sequencing and validation gates. The only notable gap is progressive disclosure: large templated sections could be externalized into reference files.
Suggestions
Move the patch-record markdown template (Phase 6) and the bug-classification table into reference files (e.g. references/patch-record-template.md) and link to them one level deep to reduce inline bulk.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes competence, using terse bullets, tables, and exact file paths without explaining concepts Claude already knows, so every token earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, executable guidance: exact production file paths, AskUserQuestion prompts with literal option strings, specific slash-command invocations, and named agent Task spawns, leaving no ambiguity about what to do. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The seven phases are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints ('Do not proceed to Phase 4 until the rollback plan is written', 'QA verdict must be PASS or PASS WITH WARNINGS') and feedback loops for FAIL recovery. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist and the ~227-line body is well-organized into sections, but substantial content like the full patch-record template and classification tables is inline rather than split into one-level-deep references. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |