Content
82%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-sequenced review workflow with concrete directives and a verification step, appropriately deferring policy detail to external repo docs. The main gap is the absence of an explicit failure-feedback loop and concrete command examples.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and directive ("Read root AGENTS.md for the current release policy", "Run Buf breaking checks and tests"), assumes Claude's competence, and contains no concept-padding or unnecessary explanation. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Gives concrete, specific guidance — a change taxonomy (additive/behavioral/deprecated/breaking), an explicit behavioral-check list (authorization, errors, pagination, cursors, retries, realtime), and a named tool (Buf) — but offers no copy-paste commands or examples. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered 1–5 sequence with a verification checkpoint ("Run Buf breaking checks and tests", "A passing schema check does not prove behavioral compatibility"), but no explicit fix→re-validate feedback loop on check failure. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Short, well-organized body with clearly signaled one-level-deep references (root AGENTS.md, proto/AGENTS.md, ADR-045); no bundle files exist, so structure is scored on the body alone, which is appropriately split between orientation and the numbered workflow. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |