Content
82%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 highly actionable with concrete CLI commands and a clearly sequenced lifecycle workflow, organized into clean sections; its main weakness is the lack of an explicit validation/retry feedback loop and some inline conceptual padding.
Suggestions
Add an explicit verify step after lifecycle transitions (e.g. re-read the task JSON to confirm the new status) with a retry-on-failure loop.
Consider moving the Team Big Five / ATEM coordination checklist into a separate reference file to tighten the main body.
Trim the conceptual prose in Dispatch Discipline and the Big Five section to direct imperatives.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Largely lean and directive with copy-paste templates and specific paths; the main over-explanation is the conceptual "Team Big Five / ATEM Coordination Gate" checklist, which revisits team-coordination concepts Claude already knows. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready CLI interop commands with complete JSON payloads (send-message, claim-task, transition-task-status, mailbox-list) and concrete file paths covering the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Startup, inbox/task, and mailbox flows are clearly numbered with guardrails (claim before work, don't write lifecycle fields directly, release only for rollback), but it lacks an explicit verify-transition-succeeded / retry-on-failure feedback loop. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into clear single-file sections with no nested or broken references and no bundle files to navigate; held back from 5 by the inline conceptual Big Five/ATEM content that could live in a separate reference. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |