Content
78%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 and highly actionable with concrete prompts and a clear load protocol, but progressive disclosure is undermined by a referenced file that is not present in the bundle. Tightening a few editorial lines would further improve conciseness.
Suggestions
Add the missing references/anonymization-protocol.md file (or inline its rules and drop the reference) so the progressive-disclosure pointer resolves.
Remove softening editorial lines such as 'Context is what turns generic advice into specific insight' and the duplicate Keywords section to tighten conciseness.
Add an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop for the context-file update path (e.g., re-read the file after append and confirm the timestamp/field landed correctly) to raise workflow clarity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient — tables, bullet lists, and verbatim prompts assume Claude's competence. Not 5 because a few editorial lines pad it ('Context is what turns generic advice into specific insight', 'Handle gracefully — never block the conversation') and the Keywords section duplicates the description; not 3 because there is no concept over-explanation. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is copy-paste ready: exact file path, exact >90-day threshold, verbatim prompt strings, enumerated parse fields, and explicit 'Never send externally' / 'Safe to use' lists. Not below 5 because the in-body rules and prompts cover the common cases concretely. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Load Protocol is a clearly sequenced 3-step branch with a confidence/action table, and enrichment includes a 'Never silently overwrite... Always confirm before modifying' checkpoint. Not 5 because there is no structured validate→fix→retry feedback loop; not 3 because checkpoints (staleness, quality signals, confirm-before-write) are present. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well-organized and the anonymization detail is correctly pushed to a one-level-deep reference signaled in a dedicated References section, but the referenced file references/anonymization-protocol.md does not exist, so the navigation path dead-ends. Not 4 because a referenced path that fails to resolve is a real navigation defect, not a minor gap. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |