Content
72%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 concise and reasonably actionable with a clear enumerated checklist of required shot/prompt elements, but it lacks an explicit sequenced workflow with checkpoints and fails to point to the available reference file.
Suggestions
Link the existing reference, e.g. under a continuity bullet: "See [references/shot-continuity.md](references/shot-continuity.md) for continuity tracking details."
Add a short numbered workflow (beat → shot list → continuity check → image prompts → review against constraints) to make the sequence explicit.
Include one compact worked example (a beat turned into a shot + a generation-ready image prompt) to lift actionability.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is a lean set of tight bullets with no padding and no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line is task-specific guidance that assumes competence. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, specific guidance enumerates what each shot and image prompt must contain (dramatic purpose, visual subject, action, spatial relation, shot size, continuity), but no worked example of a finished shot breakdown or image prompt is provided. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The bullets imply a conceptual sequence (translate beats → define shot elements → preserve continuity → refine → build prompts → separate layers → respect constraints), but steps are not explicitly sequenced and there are no validation checkpoints; this is not a destructive/batch operation so the hard cap does not apply. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-organized as an overview, but the existing references/shot-continuity.md is never linked or signaled from the body, so navigation to the deeper material is missing. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |