Content
100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews 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, actionable reference: executable commands, a sequenced workflow with verification checkpoints, and well-organized sections. It assumes Claude's competence and contains no padding or unnecessary explanation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — compact command list, terse workflow, and only high-value prose such as 'Partial matches... risk sending work to the wrong agent'; it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows. Every token earns its place, matching the score-3 anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Commands are fully executable with real flags (e.g. 'agent start --type codex --name <name> --cwd <path>' and 'agent send --id <name> --wait --timeout 120000 --json ...') plus a copy-paste-ready assignment example, meeting the score-3 'copy-paste ready' bar. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear six-step sequence includes explicit checkpoints ('Inspect before acting' and 'Verify completed work before reporting it done'), so it rises above the score-2 'checkpoints missing or implicit' anchor. It is not a destructive/batch operation and verification is present, so it is not capped at 2. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Under 50 lines with no external references needed, the content is organized into well-signaled sections (Workflow, Commands, Assignment Rules), which the rubric's simple-skills note says can score 3. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |