Content
53%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, concrete orchestration workflow, but it is monolithic with a broken external reference and lacks inter-phase validation gates for a batch operation. Tightening the fluff and adding real validation steps plus genuine reference files would raise the lowest dimensions.
Suggestions
Add explicit validation checkpoints between phases — e.g. 'Phase 1 exit: confirm the OpenAPI spec and data models are complete and reviewed before starting Phase 2' and 'Phase 2 exit: each platform impl passes its own tests before Phase 3' — to satisfy the batch-operation validation requirement.
Fix or remove the broken reference: 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' does not exist. Either create the file and split the bulky per-platform prompt specs into it (true progressive disclosure) or drop the reference.
Cut the 'Extended thinking' paragraph and the generic 'Use this skill when / Do not use this skill when' boilerplate to tighten conciseness; assume Claude knows why cross-platform coordination matters.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The per-platform Task prompts are concrete and earn their tokens, but the opening 'Extended thinking:' paragraph ('orchestrates multiple specialized agents...', 'benefits include faster time-to-market, reduced integration issues...') and the generic 'Use this skill when / Do not use this skill when' boilerplate are unnecessary justification Claude does not need, matching 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation'. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Each step gives a concrete Task call with subagent_type, a detailed prompt enumerating specific libraries (Next.js 14, SwiftUI, Jetpack Compose, Tauri) and expected outputs; it is mostly executable, but placeholders like '[API spec]', '[previous output]', and '$ARGUMENTS' require manual wiring and several subagent_type values may not exist, leaving minor gaps versus copy-paste-ready. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The sequence is genuinely clear (Phase 1 sequential, Phase 2 parallel 4a–4d, Phase 3 integration, numbered with per-step expected outputs), but there are no explicit validation gates between phases ('only proceed when API spec validated'), and because parallel multi-platform implementation is a batch operation the rubric caps workflow clarity at 3 for missing validation checkpoints. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Nearly all content (per-platform prompts, configuration, success criteria, platform considerations) is inlined into one ~200-line file, and the single external reference — 'open resources/implementation-playbook.md' — points to a directory/file that does not exist (no resources/ bundle present), so structure is minimal and the one reference is broken. | 2 / 5 |
Total | 12 / 20 Passed |