Content
90%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 exceptionally lean and gives a single concrete, executable command with its output contract. It loses a little only on workflow_clarity (no explicit recovery loop) and progressive_disclosure (an unreferenced bundle file).
Suggestions
Add a one-line error-recovery instruction, e.g. 'If it exits non-zero, report the failure and stop', to give the workflow an explicit feedback loop.
Either reference references/REFERENCE.md from the body (e.g. 'See references/REFERENCE.md for evidence standards') or remove it if unused, so the bundle structure is fully signposted.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line ('Process steps in order', the run command, the output contract, 'Finish here') earns its place. This matches the score 5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It gives a fully executable, copy-paste-ready command and states its output contract ('emits {"ok":true} on stdout and exits non-zero on failure'). No pseudocode or gaps, matching the score 5 anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | There is a clear sequence with an explicit validation checkpoint (the check script that fails non-zero on error), but no error-recovery feedback loop ('if it fails, do X') is specified. This fits score 4 rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is short and well-sectioned and references the real scripts/check.sh one level deep, but references/REFERENCE.md exists in the bundle without being signposted from the body — a minor organization gap keeping it at 4 rather than 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |