Content
75%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.
A well-structured resume workflow with concrete commands and a precise routing decision tree, appropriately deferring canonical detail to workflow.md. Minor trims and an explicit failure/retry path would lift it to top marks.
Suggestions
Tighten the explanatory asides (e.g., 'Confirms: current task, git state, recent commits' and the Trellis-flow sentence) or fold them into the command comments to improve conciseness.
Add a brief error-recovery note for when get_context.py fails or returns unexpected status, giving the workflow an explicit feedback loop.
Consider moving the dense status-routing table into .trellis/workflow.md and keeping a condensed 2–3 line summary here to sharpen progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and assumes Claude's competence; minor explanatory lines ('Confirms: current task, git state, recent commits', 'This command replaces the user needing to remember the Trellis flow') could be trimmed but earn their place. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Gives concrete, runnable commands (get_context.py with --mode phase, --step <X.X> --platform kiro) and a precise status-based routing table; the <X.X> placeholder and dynamically-loaded step instructions are minor gaps versus copy-paste-ready 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear Step 1–4 sequence with an explicit decision tree routing on status + artifact presence and a user-confirmation checkpoint before task.py start; no error-recovery feedback loop for command failures, so it sits below 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Acts as an entry point with a well-signaled one-level reference to .trellis/workflow.md for canonical detail; the inline routing table is arguably overview-level but is fairly dense, keeping it just below 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |