Content
85%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 well-structured router with a clear sequenced workflow, explicit validation and feedback loops, and an exemplary progressive-disclosure layout whose referenced files all exist on disk. Only minor conciseness and actionability trimming keeps it from a perfect score.
Suggestions
Break the long run-on sentence in step 3 ('Follow the workflow... parse manuscript metadata, decision type, ... run QA; and derive package readiness') into a bulleted or numbered list so each workflow action is scannable.
Inline a one-line summary of the decision-type gate action (e.g. the exact 'ask Major vs Minor Revision' prompt) so the router is actionable without opening intake-and-routing.md for the most common case.
Consider a short 'Quick path' block at the top for the common minor-revision draft case to reduce reliance on loading the full core for trivial jobs.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The router is intentionally short and avoids re-explaining concepts Claude knows, delegating depth to on-demand references; however, step 3 packs a very long run-on enumeration of workflow actions that could be tightened into a list, keeping it just below a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance is present — specific file paths, ID conventions (E.1, R1.1, R2.1), and a runnable script (scripts/check_package_consistency.py) with explicit re-run triggers — but the body leans heavily on pointers to other files rather than inlining the steps themselves, leaving minor gaps. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear four-step routing protocol is sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints: the mandatory decision-type intake gate, the QA run, and the package-consistency audit re-run after every manuscript edit and before delivery (a genuine validate-fix-retry feedback loop). | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Verified against the bundle: the 12 references/ files (intake-and-routing.md, comment-taxonomy.md, action-mapping.md, tone-and-stance.md, difficult-cases.md, chinese-author-alignment.md, latex-templates.md, package-consistency-audit.md, qa-checklist.md, etc.) and scripts/check_package_consistency.py all exist and match the cited paths; the two-layer static/dynamic split keeps references one level deep and well-signaled via the on-demand table. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |