Content
63%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-sequenced, highly actionable workflow with strong concrete CSS/viewport guidance, but it is weakened by redundant aesthetics coaching and by a broken progressive-disclosure layer where most referenced bundle files do not actually exist.
Suggestions
Tighten the Design Aesthetics section: collapse the bullets, the 'Avoid generic AI-generated aesthetics' list, and the closing 'think outside the box' paragraph into a single concise list to remove redundancy.
Ship the referenced bundle files (STYLE_PRESETS.md, viewport-base.css, html-template.md, animation-patterns.md) under the expected paths, or remove the references and inline the minimal content — the Supporting Files table currently points to content that is not present.
Add an explicit post-generation verification checkpoint in Phase 3 (e.g., 'Verify every .slide is overflow:hidden and content fits at 1280x720; if it overflows, split the slide and regenerate') to close the viewport-fit feedback loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient and actionable, but the Design Aesthetics section restates the 'avoid AI slop / generic fonts' message across the bullets, the 'Avoid generic AI-generated aesthetics' list, and a closing exhortation ('it is critical that you think outside the box!'), which is redundant and could be tightened, matching the 'mostly efficient with some unnecessary explanation' anchor. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance is pervasive: exact CSS rules ('height: 100vh; height: 100dvh; overflow: hidden;', 'clamp(min, preferred, max)'), the '-clamp() -> calc(-1 * clamp())' gotcha, a density-limits table, exact commands ('python scripts/extract-pptx.py <input.pptx> <output_dir>'), and preview save paths; it falls short of 5 because full templates/code are deferred to reference files and the AskUserQuestion calls are described in prose rather than as ready tool invocations. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Phases 0-5 are clearly sequenced with branching and real checkpoints (Mode C's 5-point verify checklist, 'Confirm via AskUserQuestion', 'Confirm with user' in Phase 4), fitting the clear-sequence-most-checkpoints anchor; it does not reach 5 because Phase 3 (new generation) lacks an explicit post-generation 'verify each slide fits the viewport' feedback loop, which the NON-NEGOTIABLE viewport rule implicitly demands. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The reference design is well-signaled and one-level-deep with a clear Supporting Files table (purpose + when-to-read per file), but scoring against the actual bundle reveals 4 of the 5 referenced files (STYLE_PRESETS.md, viewport-base.css, html-template.md, animation-patterns.md) are absent from the bundle, so the disclosure navigates mostly to missing content — between good-structure (4) and poorly-signaled (3). | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |