Content
72%Weight 40%Scale 1-3Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is highly actionable with accurate executable CLI examples and good progressive disclosure to one-level-deep reference files. Weaknesses are duplicated example commands and the absence of validation/feedback checkpoints in a batch trading-signal workflow.
Suggestions
Remove the redundant Examples section or replace it with non-overlapping use cases, since four of its commands duplicate the Instructions section verbatim.
Add an explicit validation/feedback checkpoint to the scan workflow (e.g. confirm data was fetched and retry/back off on rate limits before trusting signals).
Link the existing references/examples.md from the body so all bundle files are discoverable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly lean with no concept padding, but the Examples section repeats four command patterns already shown in Instructions (e.g. '--watchlist crypto_top10 --period 6m' and '--symbols BTC-USD --detail' each appear twice), so it could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Every example is a fully executable, copy-paste-ready command whose flags match scanner.py's argparse exactly (--watchlist, --symbols, --detail, --filter, --min-confidence, --rank, --output, --list-watchlists, --period). | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Variants are clearly numbered, but this batch signal-generation workflow over many assets has no inline validation or feedback checkpoints (e.g. verify data fetched, retry on rate limit), so per the batch-operations guideline workflow clarity is capped at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The overview appropriately points one level deep to clearly signaled real files (references/implementation.md and references/errors.md), both confirmed to exist, with content properly split out of the main body. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |