Content
92%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 an efficient, well-structured overview that delegates detail to verified one-level-deep references and includes explicit runtime verification. The only minor gap is that executable specifics live in the referenced files rather than inline.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (lifecycle contract, paths, and a reference table) with no padded concept explanations, matching the 'every token earns its place' anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete guidance is present (specific `skills_tool` invocation, named lifecycle functions install/pre_update/uninstall, exact paths like `/a0/usr/plugins/<name>/`), but it relies on references rather than inline code, matching 'mostly executable guidance; minor gaps'. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Working Flow' is a clear five-step sequence with an explicit validation checkpoint (verify the real runtime, read references/review.md before declaring complete, report actual checks), matching the top anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A well-signaled reference table maps each work type to a one-level-deep file, all four referenced files exist, and detail is appropriately split out, matching the top anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |