Content
82%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 constraints checklist with clean sectioning and a clear invocation workflow. The main gap is the absence of any inline good/bad code examples to anchor the directives.
Suggestions
Add 1–2 short before/after code snippets illustrating a typical violation and its fix to make the review pass concrete.
Show an example output of `/baseline-ui <file>` (violation + why-it-matters + fix) so the review format is unambiguous.
Consider moving the full Tailwind z-index scale or component-primitive list into a reference file to keep the body lean and enable progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every line is a lean directive with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows (Tailwind, animation, accessibility); each token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Directives are concrete and executable (specific classes like `h-dvh`, libraries like `motion/react`, thresholds like `200ms`), but no inline code examples show correct vs. incorrect application for the instruction-only guidance. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The "How to use" section gives an unambiguous single-purpose workflow with a defined review output format (violations, why it matters, fix), though it lacks explicit validation checkpoints; no destructive ops require them. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized into clearly labeled sections (Stack, Components, Animation, etc.) with no external references needed, but at ~80 lines it slightly exceeds the simple-skill threshold where sectioning alone would merit a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |