Content
86%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 rule set with concrete tool calls, explicit sequencing, and a delivery guarantee. The main gap is the absence of an explicit validation/retry checkpoint for memory writes and worked argument examples.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean bullet-driven rules with no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows and no padding; every line is an actionable directive that assumes competence. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Names concrete tool calls (mem_save, mem_context, mem_search, mem_session_summary), a structured content schema (What/Why/Where/Learned), and an explicit ordering rule, but provides no example payloads or argument shapes. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Multi-step sequences are clearly numbered (Session Close 1-2, After compaction 1-2-3) with a delivery-guarantee fallback, but there is no explicit validate->fix->retry checkpoint confirming a mem_write succeeded before proceeding. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines, single-purpose, with clean well-labeled section headers and no nested references; meets the simple-skill exception allowing a 5 on well-organized sections alone. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |