Content
85%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 tightly structured, highly actionable workflow with concrete JSON templates and an explicit validation step. Its only weakness is mild redundancy from the motivational Red Flags/Rationalizations sections that restate existing rules.
Suggestions
Trim or collapse the 'Red Flags' and 'Common Rationalizations' sections, which restate rules already covered in 'Remember' and the step rules.
Merge the 'Remember' bullet list with the inline per-step rules to avoid duplicating the context_files/reference_files and binary-criteria guidance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The core process is lean with concrete JSON templates, but the 'Red Flags', 'Common Rationalizations' table, and 'Remember' section restate rules already given, adding padding that could be tightened — matching 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation'. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It provides complete, executable JSON templates with exact file paths (`.tmp/tasks/{feature}/subtask_01.json`), explicit field rules, and a copy-paste summary format, matching 'fully executable code/commands; specific examples; copy-paste ready'. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear five-step sequence (Analyze → Plan → Generate → Validate → Return) includes an explicit validation checkpoint (Step 4's ✅ checklist) and error-recovery framing via Red Flags, matching 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops'. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | There are no bundle files (references/scripts/assets absent); the ~150-line body is self-contained with well-labeled sections and no nested references, so under the simple-skill scoring note the organization alone merits a 3. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |