Content
58%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 workflow logic is genuinely strong — clear sequencing, explicit validation gates, and thorough error-recovery paths — but the document pays for it in redundancy, restating the same rules across five different sections, and never concretizes its central artifacts. Consolidating the duplicate representations and adding one example brief or design-doc template would lift both conciseness and actionability.
Suggestions
Collapse the duplicated workflow representations (Scenes, Canonical workflow path, Execution Phases, Guardrails) into a single canonical sequence plus a short guardrails/pitfalls list; rules like "one question at a time" and the TRIZ-lite applicability condition currently appear 4-6 times each.
Add one compact example of a prose brief (scenario, mechanism, residual risk, effort) and a skeleton of the docs/decisions/{NNN}-{name}.md document so the primary outputs are concrete rather than described.
Move the TRIZ-lite applicability rules and principle-set limits (max 3-5 principles, no fake scores/full ARIZ) into resources/triz-lite.md and keep a one-line trigger in the body.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The same rules are restated many times across sections: "one question at a time" appears in Control-flow features, ACQUIRE, the canonical path, Guardrail 2, Phase 2, and Pitfalls; TRIZ-lite applicability conditions repeat ~6 times; the blind-review-before-save rule and the docs/decisions/ save path each repeat 4-5 times. Noticeably verbose from duplication, though it never explains concepts Claude already knows (not 1). | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete specifics exist (save to `docs/decisions/{NNN}-{name}.md`, update index, Tier 1/2/3 issue consolidation, record `brainstorm.option-selection` with matching `--instance`), but the skill's key artifacts are never shown: no example prose brief (scenario/mechanism/residual risk), no design-document section template, no sample question sequence. Some concrete guidance but incomplete — anchor 3, not 4 which requires mostly executable guidance. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The process is clearly sequenced (Entry → PREPARE/ACQUIRE/REASON/VERIFY/FINALIZE, mirrored by Phases 1–7) with explicit validation gates ("blind review round ... before saving", "resolve Tier 1 issues") and genuine feedback loops (user rejects → revise; question unanswered → propose assumptions; approaches collapse → identify constraint, optionally TRIZ reseed; implementation pressure → defer). Matches the anchor-5 example of explicit validation steps with error-recovery loops. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files ship in this review copy, but the body's references (resources/triz-lite.md and five ../_shared/core/*.md files) are one level deep and clearly signaled in a dedicated References section. Minor gaps: three parallel inline representations of the same workflow (Scenes, Canonical workflow path, Execution Phases) keep content inline that is redundant rather than split out — good structure but not the clean overview/subfile split of anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |