Content
50%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is well-sectioned and provides real commands, a parameter table, and an explicit workflow with error-handling fallbacks, but it is padded with redundant sections and a thin headline example. The one-level reference is correctly signaled, though much content stays inline.
Suggestions
Remove redundancy: drop the verbatim description echo in 'Key Features', merge 'Quick Check' and 'Audit-Ready Commands', and delete the empty 'See ## ... above' cross-reference lines.
Make the 'Example' section executable: show an actual `python scripts/main.py --input ... --output ...` invocation and the resulting TSV lines, instead of a lone Q/A fragment.
Tighten the Workflow's script-vs-manual decision into an explicit conditional gate (e.g. 'If --input is a Q/A file, run the script; otherwise produce a manual card blueprint').
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly operational but carries clear redundancy: 'Key Features' repeats the description verbatim, 'Quick Check' and 'Audit-Ready Commands' duplicate the same py_compile command, and cross-references like 'See ## Prerequisites above' / 'See ## Workflow above' add little, fitting 'mostly efficient but could be tightened'. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Real commands (py_compile, --help) and a concrete Parameters table are present, but the headline 'Example' section shows only 'Q: What is the mechanism of metformin?' with no invocation or expected output, and the run plan is abstract, matching 'some concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details'. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-step Workflow plus Error Handling provide validation checkpoints and fallback paths, but the decision gate between 'use the packaged script' and 'produce a manual card plan' is implicit rather than a clean conditional checkpoint, fitting 'steps listed but validation gaps; checkpoints implicit'. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The single reference (references/audit-reference.md) is real, one level deep, and clearly signaled under ## References, but substantial material (risk assessment, security checklist, lifecycle) is inline that could be split out, matching 'some structure; references present but content that should be separate is inline'. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |