Content
88%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 tightly written, fully executable verification ladder with strong sequencing and explicit validation feedback loops. Its only weak spots are minor verbosity in the anecdotal justifications and the lack of separated reference files.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and mostly commands with terse justification, but the embedded war stories ('burned twice', the v0.9.10 clippy anecdote) are slightly verbose even though they are load-bearing for the rules they motivate. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands throughout — `cargo fmt --all -- --check`, `scripts/dev-test.sh ...`, the full set of `python3 scripts/check-*.py` budget checks, and an exact clippy invocation with all flags — covering the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced Rung 1–5 ladder ordered by risk, with explicit validation checkpoints (quote the real test-result line, confirm N>0 for the relevant tests, focused rerun before calling a flake) and an Output checklist; feedback loops are present throughout. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into clear sections with one-level-deep, clearly signaled references to sibling skills and repo docs; no bundle files exist to defer to, and the bulk stays inline, leaving minor organization gaps versus a fully split structure. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |