Content
70%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 content delivers a clear, well-validated multi-step consensus workflow with strong actionability and feedback loops, but it is padded by repeated restatements of the sequential-review rule and makes no use of bundle files for progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
State the Architect/Critic sequential-and-independent rule once in a dedicated callout and reference it from steps 3-4 instead of restating it four times.
Move the company-context interface details into a bundled references/ file and link to it with a clearly signaled section rather than burying the reference in step 0.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient, but the Architect/Critic sequential-and-independent rule is restated roughly four times (steps 3, 4, the blockquote, and the 'Important' note), which is unnecessary padding that could be tightened. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete slash-commands, exact flag behaviors, specific approval options, and good/bad prompt examples, with only minor gaps from delegating full detail to the Plan skill documentation. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 0-8 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints (pending-approval gate, APPROVE/ITERATE/REJECT verdicts, a max-5 re-review feedback loop, and a pre-execution gate), matching the anchor for clear sequences with feedback loops. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files are provided and all content is inlined in one file; the single external reference (docs/company-context-interface.md) is buried inside step 0 rather than clearly signaled, fitting the some-structure anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |