Content
100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is terse, concrete, and well-sequenced with explicit validation feedback loops, assuming domain competence and avoiding concept explanations. Progressive disclosure is well-structured with one-level references and a confirmed bundled runtime file.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and dense throughout — typed catalog IDs, profile mappings, and protocol constraints with no tutorial padding about concepts Claude already knows; every line earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete executable guidance: specific item IDs (E1, C1–C10, H1/H2, O1), exact profile→assessment_mode/archetype mappings, file paths, and explicit fail-closed states (NOT_SCORED / not_scored). | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequenced procedure (declare → score → verify vetoes → report) with an explicit Validation Checkpoints section and a validate→fix→revalidate feedback loop in Persistence for a batch/destructive context. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Body is an overview that signals one-level-deep references (Reference Materials links, bundled auditor-runtime.md confirmed present); navigation is clear even though several ../../../ paths resolve outside this bundle. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |