Content
60%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 well-structured with a strong mandatory output template, clear execution sequence, and well-integrated one-level-deep references, but it is materially weakened by heavy repetition of the same constraints and inline duplication of reference content. Trimming redundancy and adding a worked before/after example would most improve it.
Suggestions
Collapse the repeated meaning-preservation/anti-overstatement material into a single authoritative section (e.g., Hard Rules) and have other sections reference it instead of restating it.
Keep the hard-rules and meaning-preservation content only in their reference files, replacing the inline copies with a one-line pointer to avoid duplication.
Add at least one concrete before/after worked example showing a precision edit (terminology fix, tense correction, claim-boundary preservation) to lift actionability toward fully executable guidance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The meaning-preservation and anti-overstatement constraints are restated across roughly seven sections (Task, Scope Boundary, Important Distinctions, Core Function, Execution, Hard Rules, Should-Not-Do, Quality Standard), and the hard-rules content is duplicated inline, producing substantial padding rather than occasional tightening. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | A concrete mandatory seven-part output template (A–G) and eight sequenced execution steps give mostly executable guidance, but no worked before/after example of an actual precision edit leaves a minor gap. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The eight-step execution sequence is clearly ordered with validation checkpoints (clarify-first loop, Input Match Check, Boundary Check, Step 6 overstrengthening check), but the checkpoints lack crisp pass/fail criteria, keeping it just below a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Seven one-level-deep reference files are each well-signaled with per-file usage guidance and all verified to exist, but the hard-rules and meaning-preservation content is also duplicated inline rather than kept solely in references, a minor organization gap. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |