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 a tight, well-organized framework with concrete if-then diagnostic rules and an explicit validation checklist, so it scores well across the board. The only notable gaps are minor redundancy in the Overview/Expected Outcome lines and the absence of a worked example or template for the final persuasive message.
Suggestions
Remove or tighten the Overview and Expected Outcome sections, which restate the description without adding actionable guidance.
Add a short worked example or message template showing how to translate a diagnosed motivation into an actual argument.
Reorder the principles into a true temporal workflow (assess trust/relationship → diagnose motivation → match message → avoid dangers → speak) so the sequence matches execution order.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Largely lean and efficient with no padding of concepts Claude already knows, but the Overview and Expected Outcome lines restate the description's gist and add slight aspirational filler that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, specific guidance — explicit if-then matching rules (fame vs. profit) and enumerated danger zones to avoid — with only a minor gap: no template or worked example for crafting the actual message. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A numbered principle structure plus a dedicated Validation section with three explicit checkpoints (including a conditional 'delay bold counsel if shallow' retry) gives clear sequencing, though the principle order is not strictly a temporal workflow. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well under 50 lines with no need for external references, and content is cleanly organized into clearly headed sections (Overview, Key Principles, Expected Outcome, Validation), satisfying the simple-skill exception. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |