Content
68%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 an efficient, well-structured authoring standard with concrete rules and a size-limits table. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit validation/feedback loop in its prescribed workflow.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validate→fix→retry checkpoint to the 'Workflow Structure (Required order)' section so authored workflows are verified before saving.
Expand references/example.md from its stub into a real, loadable template or worked example so the references/ path earns its place.
Tighten or remove the 'Canonical response anchors' section if it duplicates rules already stated in Core Rules or Anti-Patterns.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean bullet rules with no concept re-explanation, but the 'Canonical response anchors' section and a couple of imperfectly worded self-check lines keep it just below fully lean. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete do/don't rules plus a specific size-limits table give mostly executable guidance, though some rules state principles ('Templates, not examples') rather than directly executable steps. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Required structure order and a self-check checklist provide a rough sequence, but there is no explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop and the structure block stays abstract. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized sections with one-level-deep references signaled in the size-limits table and a real references/example.md bundle present, though the bundle is a near-empty stub. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |