Content
67%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 delivers a genuinely actionable PM workflow: a complete mandatory template, exact file-naming and handoff conventions, clarification gates, and a well-specified audit-remediation loop. Its weaknesses are redundancy (persona theatrics, duplicated directives) and a convoluted step 9 that would benefit from being flattened or split.
Suggestions
Cut the "Dynamic Persona Activation [CRITICAL SYSTEM OVERRIDE]" theatrics and state the persona and session-lock rule in one plain paragraph — the framing adds tokens without adding instruction.
State the clarification protocol once and cross-reference it from the workflow (or vice versa); the same applies to the handoff routing, which currently appears in both Core Directive 5 and Workflow step 9.
Break the dense step 9 into a short numbered list or move the remediation sub-procedure to a reference file, and either specify the GitHub-issue creation commands concretely or drop step 7's vague "output the terminal commands" instruction.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The PRD template, file-naming convention, and workflow steps earn their tokens, but the "CRITICAL SYSTEM OVERRIDE" persona theatrics, the clarification protocol stated twice (Core Directive 3 and Workflow step 2), and handoff instructions repeated in both Directive 5 and step 9 are unnecessary padding that could be tightened. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | The guidance is mostly executable for an instruction-only skill: an exact file format with a worked example ("prd-20260713-1346-login-system.md"), copy-paste handoff prompts, an exact refusal message, and a complete fill-in template. The GitHub-issue step ("output the terminal commands") gives no concrete command format, and the workflow leans on external files (AGENTS.md, .agents/standards/) whose presence is assumed, keeping it below fully-executable. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Nine clearly sequenced steps with explicit checkpoints — a Context Check gate, a Stop & Ask protocol, and score-threshold routing (>= 80 / < 80) after remediation — plus an audit→fix→re-score feedback loop. Step 9 is dense and hard to follow, and the normal creation path has no verification of the generated PRD before handoff, so it falls short of the explicit-validation (5) anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist, and the body is organized into clearly headed sections with the mandatory template — used on every invocation — appropriately inline. The ~25-line Documentation Standards section covering CONTEXT.md/ADR conventions is tangential to PRD drafting and the >50-line body cannot claim the simple-skill exception, so it does not reach a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |