Content
75%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 content is well-structured, domain-specific, and actionable with concrete commands and a clear diff-analysis sequence plus a sync feedback loop. It is held at 4 across dimensions by minor over-explanation, interpretive analysis steps, and slight section overlap rather than any real deficiency.
Suggestions
Tighten the Mental Model paragraph so the 'large cargokit diff' restatement is a single sentence instead of two, removing the only padding in an otherwise lean body.
Add an explicit validation checkpoint to the Diff Analysis Order (e.g. 'Confirm the copied files match the submodule SHA before judging them as local edits') to lift workflow clarity toward 5.
Merge or cross-reference 'What To Say Explicitly' and 'Common Mistakes' since both cover the same layer-confusion failure mode, reducing structural overlap.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is sectioned and lean with domain-specific (not generic) explanation, but a few sentences restate the propagation point (e.g. the 'large cargokit diff ... may only mean a template or submodule change' pair), matching 'efficient with minor instances of over-explanation' rather than the every-token-earns-its-place anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives concrete executable commands ("./frb_internal sync-cargokit-copies", "./frb_internal generate-internal --set-exit-if-changed --coverage") and exact source-of-truth paths, but some diff-analysis steps are interpretive ("Compare the old and new submodule SHAs") without a copy-paste command, fitting anchor 4. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Diff Analysis Order' is a clear 4-step sequence and the sync section includes a feedback loop (drift -> fix source -> re-sync -> commit) with a CI diff-gate checkpoint, but the primary analysis workflow lacks explicit validation checkpoints, so anchor 4 fits better than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist; the body is well-sectioned and points one level deep to sibling skills (frb-code-generation, frb-debugging) in the Scope Boundary, giving good structure with minor organization overlap between 'What To Say Explicitly' and 'Common Mistakes', matching anchor 4. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |