Content
65%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 tight, well-structured, actionable VFX prompting guide with copy-paste example phrases, but it leans on a Director's Read reference that is absent from the bundle, which weakens workflow clarity, actionability, and progressive disclosure simultaneously.
Suggestions
Either add the referenced ../../references/directors-read.md file or remove/inline the dependency so the opening workflow step is actually executable.
Add an explicit validation checkpoint, e.g. 'Before returning, verify the phrase states source, motion path, interaction, dissipation, and endpoint' to convert the implicit contract into a feedback loop.
Trim the poetic Intent sentence to a one-line design rationale to lift conciseness toward the fully-lean anchor.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean (~33 lines), assumes Claude's competence, and does not explain what VFX or physics are; the only minor trim candidate is the poetic Intent line ("wonder dies the moment it stops obeying physics... so the impossible reads as witnessed rather than rendered"), placing it at 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' rather than the fully lean anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, copy-paste-ready prompt phrases in the effects table, an explicit state contract, and a `forms -> travels -> dissipates` timing template cover the common cases; it stops short of fully executable because the opening step directs Claude to load [Director's Read](../../references/directors-read.md), a file that is not present in the bundle. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear sequence exists (load read -> classify brief -> complete record -> translate to carriers -> return contract) but validation is implicit only (the Effects Contract state list) rather than an explicit checkpoint, and the first step is broken because the referenced file is missing — matching 'steps present but checkpoints missing or implicit'. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Section structure is good (Intent, Effects Contract, Integration Rules, Timing, Output Contract) and the single external reference is clearly signaled as a one-level-deep markdown link, but the references/ directory does not exist so the Director's Read link is dangling — a missing target is more than a minor organization gap, so it cannot reach 4. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |