Content
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is concise, highly actionable, and provides a clear workflow with verification checkpoints; the main weakness is monolithic organization with no progressive disclosure into reference files.
Suggestions
Split the full command catalog and dependency/merge-conflict material into a references file (e.g. COMMANDS.md) referenced from the body to improve progressive disclosure.
Keep the most-used commands inline and move advanced edge cases (merge conflicts, MCP server) behind clearly signaled one-level-deep links.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and command-focused — tables and copy-paste code blocks — assuming Claude's competence without explaining concepts it already knows, so it matches the lean-and-efficient anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Commands are fully executable and specific (e.g. `bd ready --json`, `bd create "Title" -p 1`), with a command table and copy-paste-ready blocks matching the executable-anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The "Land the Plane" section gives a numbered sequence with an explicit verification checkpoint (`git status` must show "up to date with origin"), matching the clear-sequence-with-validation anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well-organized with clear headers, but the ~210-line body is monolithic with no bundle files or external references, and content like the full command catalog and merge-conflict handling is inline rather than split out. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |