Content
93%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.
An efficient, highly actionable scaffolding workflow with concrete commands and well-structured one-level-deep references to real example files. The only gap is the absence of an explicit error-recovery feedback loop after the build/test validation steps, which caps workflow_clarity at 4.
Suggestions
Add an explicit feedback loop after the validation steps, e.g. 'If `go build` or `go test` fails, fix the reported errors and re-run until both pass' to lift workflow_clarity toward 5.
Consider a short note on what to check when `go test ./...` fails (e.g. unrenamed DEMO_* references) so error recovery is guided rather than implicit.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean numbered steps with specific commands and no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every token earns its place, matching the level-5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable guidance — concrete commands ('go get -u ...@latest', 'go mod tidy', 'go build -o /dev/null', 'go test ./...') plus complete copy-paste-ready example files (assets/main.go, assets/provider.go) and specific rename instructions — matching the level-5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints (go build, go test) and a conditional confirm checkpoint at step 1, but it lacks an explicit error-recovery feedback loop, fitting level-4 rather than the level-5 'feedback loops for error recovery' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A concise overview pointing to one-level-deep real asset files (assets/main.go, assets/provider.go) with the bulk Go code split out and clearly signaled references, matching the level-5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |