Content
65%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a well-organized, concise design-system authoring guide with concrete tokens, rules, and a clear output structure. Its main gaps are the absence of worked examples or templates and a lack of explicit validation/feedback steps in the workflow.
Suggestions
Add one concrete worked example (e.g., a sample component-rule block with anatomy, states, and an anti-pattern) so the guidance is copy-paste ready.
Insert an explicit validation step into the workflow, such as 'Review generated guidance against the Quality Gates and QA checklist before finalizing', to close the feedback loop.
Either remove the bare 'patterns' and 'images' bullets or back them with real files in references/assets and link to them with clear signaling.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and token-efficient — bulletized tokens, rules, and a numbered workflow — and largely avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, with only minor brand filler ('Everything you need – data, apps, and AI...'). | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete tokens (hex values, font weights, spacing mode) and specific directive rules with must/should language, but includes no worked examples or templates showing an actual generated guideline, leaving guidance executable in principle but incomplete in practice. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-step Guideline Authoring Workflow and Quality Gates give a clear sequence, but there is no validation or feedback loop (e.g., checking output against the gates or retrying), so checkpoints are implicit rather than explicit. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-sectioned across clear headers, but the bare 'patterns' and 'images' bullets read as unsignaled dead references and no bundle files exist in references/scripts/assets, so navigation is incomplete. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |