Content
82%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, instruction-only review procedure that respects token budget and gives concrete guidance with a defined finding format. Its main gaps are the absence of a worked example and explicit numbered checkpoints.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Two lean paragraphs with every sentence carrying an instruction ("Trace changed behavior into its callers and tests", "Do not claim independent checks unless you ran them"), assuming Claude's competence and adding no padding, matching the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Gives concrete, specific guidance and a defined finding format ("file/line, trigger, impact, and suggested correction"), but provides no example finding output, leaving a minor gap versus the fully copy-paste-ready level-5 anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear implicit sequence (read diff/instructions → trace into callers and tests → look for issues → report findings) with verification discipline ("disclose remaining verification gaps"), though presented as prose without explicit numbered checkpoints; it is read-only review, so the destructive/batch cap does not apply. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no external references needed and no bundle files present; content is organized into an examination paragraph and a reporting paragraph, good structure with minor gaps versus the well-signaled, sectioned level-5 anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |