Content
81%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 dense, highly actionable runbook with concrete MCP calls, validation checkpoints, and feedback loops for a batch operation. Its main weaknesses are moderate redundancy (repeated filter conditions and examples that restate the flow) and minor inline/reference duplication in progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
De-duplicate the candidate filter rules: state the children_id=='|' and iteration_id=='' conditions once in §3 and reference them from §4.2 instead of restating them.
Replace the two full worked examples (which restate 执行流程) with brief input→outcome vignettes that highlight only the branch-specific behavior (new vs. reentry, auto vs. user-specified).
Move the detailed naming rules and DAG ordering rules fully into references/iteration-naming.md and references/dependency-analysis.md, keeping only a one-line summary inline to remove the inline/reference overlap.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient procedural prose with no padding of concepts Claude already knows, but it repeats the candidate filter conditions (children_id=='|' / iteration_id=='') across §3.1, §3.2 and §4.2, and the two worked examples restate the entire 执行流程, which could be tightened. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable guidance: exact MCP tool calls (iterations_get/create, stories_get/update) with parameter blocks, precise field names (v_status, children_id, iteration_id), concrete thresholds (size_limit 1000, top 20, limit 200/100), and worked examples covering the common new-iteration and specified-stories cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced five-step process with explicit branch logic (A/B), validation checkpoints (name format, total_size<=0), retry-then-fallback feedback loops for batch operations, and a comprehensive error-handling table satisfying the batch-operation validation requirement. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good structure with a 参考文件 table signaling one-level-deep references (dependency-analysis.md, iteration-naming.md) and when to read them, but naming rules and DAG ordering rules are duplicated both inline and in the reference files, a minor organization gap. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |