Content
76%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, competent set of production principles with an appropriate one-level reference. It would benefit from an explicit sequenced workflow and a worked example or two.
Suggestions
Lay out the production sequence as numbered steps (propose → confirm → write → review → cover) with explicit validation checkpoints instead of relying on distributed bullets.
Add one short worked example of a reversal-and-reward setup to make the 'visible evidence' directive concrete.
Give the reference-load instruction a section header so the navigation structure is explicit.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | A lean ~12-line directive list with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every token earns its place, matching the 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence' anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Gives concrete, specific directives ('Prefer 12–18 focused chapters', 'at most one supporting reversal line', 'Every scene must move conflict, causality, evidence, emotion, payoff, or relationship'); not 5 because there are no worked examples illustrating common cases. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A rough sequence is implied (proposal/confirmation before 'short_fiction_run' or cover) with one checkpoint ('Report partial failures honestly'), but steps are distributed across bullets rather than sequenced and most checkpoints are deferred to the referenced checklist. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A short overview with one well-signaled, one-level-deep reference ('Load references/production-checklist.md before a full production run or whole-story revision') that resolves to a real file; not 5 because the body lacks sub-headers and the reference-load instruction is a bare trailing line. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |