Content
96%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 body is dense, executable, and well-sequenced with strong validation gates, scoring near the top on conciseness, actionability, and workflow clarity. The only gap is progressive disclosure: several referenced job/shared files are missing from the bundle.
Suggestions
Add the missing referenced files (jobs/finding.md, jobs/enriching.md, jobs/researching.md, jobs/automating.md, shared/authoring.md) to the bundle, or remove the routing-table references if those pages are not shipped.
Verify that the 'jobs/' routing table links resolve before publishing so navigation is not broken for the reader.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and information-dense, assumes Claude's competence, and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows; every line carries operational weight with no padding. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands (npm install, deepline CLI, python3 scripts) and references real script files (scaffold-search-experiment.py, run-and-export-search-experiment.py, cost-receipt.py, show-declared-getters.py) covering common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Sequenced process (contract → compare → exploit → recover → export → price) with explicit validation checkpoints — structural check, Play check, completion receipt, COST RECEIPT, quality gates — and feedback loops via receipt labels (CUT CANDIDATE, NEVER REACHED). | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-signaled one-level-deep references via a routing table (jobs/finding.md, enriching.md, etc.) and references/debugging.md, but the jobs/*.md and shared/authoring.md paths do not exist in the bundle, leaving navigation partially broken. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |