Content
78%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 single-purpose workflow with concrete MCP tool calls, an explicit output template, and a basic error checkpoint. The main improvement would be adding validation/feedback detail for the digest step and de-duplicating the no-changes rules.
Suggestions
Add a brief validation note for Step 3 (e.g. what to do if get_digest returns an error) to push workflow clarity toward 5.
Consolidate the two overlapping no-changes rules into a single line to tighten conciseness.
Specify the key arguments each MCP tool expects so the guidance is fully copy-paste ready.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, with named MCP calls and a compact output template; the only redundancy is the Rules section restating the 'no changes' case, keeping it just below the 'every token earns its place' anchor at 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete, callable guidance (refresh_official_docs, diff_official_docs, get_digest with period: "day") plus an exact output template, but there are minor gaps such as unspecified argument shapes, fitting the 'mostly executable with minor gaps' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The three steps are explicitly sequenced 'in order' with one error-recovery checkpoint (baseline failure → run /ccguide:init-docs then stop), matching 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present'; it lacks a validate-then-retry loop so it does not reach 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, no external references are needed, and the content is well-organized into clearly labeled sections (Step 1-3, Output format, Rules), which per the simple-skill guidance earns a 5. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |