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, validation-rich calculation workflow with concrete formulas and a worked example, supported by a properly organized one-level-deep reference bundle. The only lever is trimming some repetitive qualification language.
Suggestions
Consolidate the repeated NEEDS_INPUT / denominator-check conventions into one stated rule rather than restating them across multiple steps.
For steps that currently emphasize what to avoid (e.g., EMV and attribution), add a one-line positive execution template inline so Claude has the exact next action, not just the constraint.
Move the bilingual summary/description fragments out of the body into frontmatter-only fields to keep the working body lean.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Dense and procedural, assuming competence without explaining what ROI/EMV/attribution are, though extensive qualification phrasing and repeated NEEDS_INPUT conventions leave minor room to tighten. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete inline formulas (Simple ROI, ROAS, EMV, LTV-based ROI) and a worked numeric example with linked step templates, but a few steps emphasize what to avoid over exact execution detail. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 10-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints (denominator > 0, NEEDS_INPUT returns, 'Done when' criteria, profitability-verification status) and feedback loops that re-gather on missing input. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Body serves as an overview with bulk templates one level deep in references/roi-templates.md via verified anchored step links, and other references are clearly signaled and single-level. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |