Content
65%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is highly actionable with concrete, executable commands and a clear section structure, but it includes tangential architecture explanation, lacks validation steps in its workflow, and references a script that is not bundled.
Suggestions
Trim or relocate the "Architecture Considerations" section so the body stays focused on the plan-creation task.
Add a validation step (e.g., confirm the file was created and frontmatter is well-formed) to the workflow.
Bundle `scripts/create-plan.ts` under a `scripts/` directory or document its expected location so the reference resolves.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The usage commands are lean, but the "Architecture Considerations" section explains PDF API layers (COS objects, gradient examples) that are tangential to creating a plan file and could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands (`bun scripts/create-plan.ts "<slug>" "content"`, heredoc, and pipe variants) with concrete examples. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The task steps are numbered and sequenced (read ARCHITECTURE.md, determine slug, gather content, create file), but there are no validation checkpoints and the link between the task list and the script options is loose. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are clearly organized, but no bundle files are present and the referenced `scripts/create-plan.ts` is not bundled, so navigation to supporting material is not verifiable. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |