Content
85%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 content is well-structured, actionable, and rich in validation checkpoints and feedback loops appropriate to a regulated CAPA process. It earns top marks on workflow clarity, with only minor conciseness and disclosure gaps (an unreferenced script, some lengthy templates).
Suggestions
Reference `scripts/root_cause_analyzer.py` from the Tools section with example invocations, so all bundled scripts are discoverable and the actionability gap is closed.
Trim or move the full worked 5-Why example and long action-plan template into `references/rca-methodologies.md`, keeping only a compact inline template in the body to improve token efficiency.
Confirm the QMSR/820.100 time-sensitive regulatory note lives in a clearly marked 'deprecated/historical' framing so the date-sensitive content does not penalize conciseness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient and assumes domain competence (e.g. no explanation of what CAPA or a fishbone diagram is), but the worked 5-Why example and several full templates add length that could be trimmed; not quite a perfectly lean score-5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides executable tool invocations (`python scripts/capa_tracker.py --capas capas.json`, `--interactive`, `--output json`, `--sample`) and a copy-paste JSON input shape, plus templates; the analyzer script is never shown in the body, leaving a minor gap versus fully executable coverage. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Each phase (investigation, RCA, corrective action, effectiveness verification) is a numbered workflow with explicit bold 'Validation:' checkpoints, decision trees, and a dedicated root-cause validation checklist, including feedback loops for ineffective CAPAs (re-investigate / revise actions). | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good one-level-deep structure with clearly signaled references (`references/rca-methodologies.md`, `references/effectiveness-verification-guide.md`) and a Reference Documentation section enumerating their contents; the bundle file `scripts/root_cause_analyzer.py` exists but is never referenced from the body, a minor organization gap. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |