Content
32%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 lean but mostly generic boilerplate with no executable guidance or sequenced workflow, and it relies on a reference file that does not exist in the bundle, leaving it effectively unactionable.
Suggestions
Provide at least one concrete, executable example (e.g. an Expo project scaffold command or a navigation/state-management code snippet) instead of abstract instructions.
Replace the generic bullet list with a real sequenced workflow with explicit validation checkpoints for risky steps like native-module integration or offline-first migration.
Create the referenced resources/implementation-playbook.md (and fix the path so it resolves) so the progressive-disclosure pointer is not broken, or move key content inline.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is short and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but the generic 'Instructions' and 'Do not use when' bullets read as boilerplate filler that earns little, fitting 'mostly efficient but could be tightened.' | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is high-level only ('Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes') with no concrete code, commands, or examples, and the single reference file does not exist, fitting 'minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints'. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Only a loose unordered bullet list (clarify goals, apply best practices, validate) with no real sequence and no validation checkpoints, matching 'rough sequence present but many gaps; validation absent'. | 2 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body delegates all detail to a single one-level-deep reference, but that file (resources/implementation-playbook.md) is not present in the bundle, so the disclosure is broken and not navigable, fitting 'minimal structure; references buried/missing'. | 2 / 5 |
Total | 9 / 20 Passed |