Content
65%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The guide is concise and well-structured with project-specific value, but its Core Concepts lack executable examples and it offers no progressive disclosure into deeper reference files. Adding small code samples and optionally splitting detailed sections into referenced files would improve it.
Suggestions
Add a minimal executable example for the ORPC IPC pattern (a Zod schema + router snippet + client call) instead of the 'Define/Implement/Call' prose.
Include a brief validation checkpoint in the workflow (e.g., run 'npm run lint' then 'npm run test:unit' before 'npm run make').
Move detailed module/API reference into a referenced file (e.g., IPC.md) and link to it one level deep to improve progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is a lean, project-specific overview (architecture diagram, terse directory list, command table, rules) with no padding of concepts Claude already knows. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives concrete commands and file paths, but the Core Concepts sections ('Define... Implement... Call...') describe rather than instruct and include no executable code examples. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Dev commands and the IPC Define-to-Call flow are sequenced, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | It is a single self-contained file with well-organized sections but no bundle references and no split of detailed material into one-level-deep files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |