Content
85%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 content is a well-structured orchestration overview with clear phased workflow, explicit validation checkpoints, and excellent progressive disclosure via verified one-level references. It is only slightly held back by minor verbosity and a few abstract directives.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and information-rich, assumes Claude's competence without explaining basic concepts, but a few explanatory clauses (e.g. "An adequate document needs no changes", "A capacity rejection is backpressure, not reviewer failure") could be trimmed, fitting efficient anchor 4 rather than the every-token-earns-its-place anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, executable guidance — specific file paths to read, `git rev-parse --show-toplevel`, dispatch rules — but some directives remain abstract ("resolve them within the authority already given"), and most execution detail lives in referenced files, placing it at anchor 4 with minor gaps rather than fully copy-paste-ready anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The multi-phase process (Phases 1-5, interactive vs non-interactive) is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints ("Verify before any dispatch", readable-path check, docs_root validation, capacity-rejection retry), a "Done when" completion checklist, and feedback loops, matching anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview that points via clearly signaled one-level-deep references (modes.md, document-intake.md, persona-selection.md, dispatch.md, synthesis-and-presentation.md, etc.) to detail split into real, verified files under references/ and references/personas/, matching the well-signaled navigation of anchor 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |