Content
67%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.
A thorough, well-structured multi-step workflow with concrete schemas, URL templates, and embedded validation/health-check logic. Its weakest dimension is conciseness — several rationale paragraphs add length without proportionate guidance value — and actionability is capped by design because the core search interface lives in external per-portal skill docs.
Suggestions
Tighten the Step 2.5 and Step 4.75 introductory paragraphs to their operational rules; move the "this is not an accusation" framing into the existing Important Rules item 9 instead of restating it inline.
Add a short, concrete example of one full portal CLI invocation (flags + `--format json`) inline so the abstract "use the portal's documented interface" guidance has a model to follow, lifting actionability toward 5.
Make the main-flow validation gates explicit (e.g. a labeled "Dedup check" checkpoint between Step 2 and Step 5) so the checkpoints read as a gated sequence rather than woven conditions, pushing workflow_clarity toward 5.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient operational guidance with no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but several long rationale paragraphs (Step 2.5's "it alone proves nothing is wrong..." and the Step 4.75 intro) could be tightened. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready concrete artifacts (the `bun --version` check, the seen_jobs.json schema, the LinkedIn URL templates, the results table format), but a significant portion of the core search logic defers to external portal SKILL.md files ("Use each portal's own documented interface — do not guess flags"), so it is not fully self-contained executable. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 0-6 are clearly sequenced with validation woven in (dedup against seen_jobs.json AND the tracker, the "URL that actually resolves" check, the 4.75 degraded scan) and feedback loops (CLI failure -> log and continue; suspect portal -> offer to disable), though some checkpoints are implicit rather than gated. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into clear step sections with one-level-deep, clearly signaled references to external docs (search-queries.md, 04-job-evaluation.md, per-portal SKILL.md files); no bundle files exist under references/scripts/assets to verify, and a fair amount of operational detail is inlined rather than split out. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |