Content
100%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is well-structured, actionable, and concise: a numbered workflow with decision gates, concrete Mermaid constraints, and clean progressive disclosure to per-type reference files that all exist. It avoids teaching concepts Claude already knows and provides explicit error-recovery guidance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean and operational throughout: it assumes Claude knows what Mermaid and diagram types are and spends its tokens on constraints, routing, and decision rules rather than concept explanation, so every section earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Gives concrete, executable guidance — specific Mermaid constraints (no emojis, no \n, camelCase IDs, quoted special chars, reserved words), an explicit routing table, and exact tool parameters with copy-ready values like `figma.com/board/{fileKey}/...`. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 7-step sequence with explicit gating checkpoints (Step 1 "Is generate_diagram the right tool?", Step 5 hybrid decision) and a feedback loop in Step 7 (stop after 2 failed attempts and ask what is wrong), satisfying the anchor for clear sequencing with error-recovery guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is an overview that routes to one-level-deep, clearly signaled references (architecture.md, flowchart.md, sequence.md, erd.md, state.md, gantt.md, workflow.md), all of which exist in ./references/; content is appropriately split with easy navigation. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |