Content
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is highly actionable with a clear, well-validated multi-mode workflow, but it underuses progressive disclosure by inlining template material that already lives in the references bundle without linking to it. Pointing Step 5 at the template file and trimming the redundant worked example would tighten it considerably.
Suggestions
Reference references/BLOG-POST-TEMPLATE.md from Step 5 (e.g. "Use BLOG-POST-TEMPLATE.md as the starting scaffold") instead of re-inlining the frontmatter and <head> template.
Shorten or remove the large worked example at the end since its structure is already covered by the template file and the inline conventions.
Consider moving the goose-specific URL/key conventions table into the references file to keep the body as an overview.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is accurate and goose-specific rather than restating what Claude knows, but the ~330-line length is padded by a full worked example that largely duplicates references/BLOG-POST-TEMPLATE.md. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete commands (gh repo clone, mkdir -p, date +%Y-%m-%d, gh api ... --jq '.id', npm start), exact paths, a complete HTML meta-tag template, and a full example make the guidance copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | An explicit 8-step sequence with a verify-author checkpoint, a present-draft-for-review feedback loop ("Iterate based on feedback until the author is satisfied"), and a final review checklist gives clear validation checkpoints. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | A bundle file (references/BLOG-POST-TEMPLATE.md) exists but is never referenced or signaled in the body, while the template/frontmatter/HEAD content it contains is inlined instead, fitting the "content that should be separate is inline" anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |