Content
65%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is highly actionable with complete, executable config but is a single monolithic file that could split large config blocks into references. Workflow sequencing lacks an explicit validation feedback loop for the gated commit operation.
Suggestions
Move the full commitlint.config.js, .versionrc.js, and lint-staged configs into a references/ file and keep only the key rules inline, reducing token load.
Add an explicit validate→fix→retry loop: after a commit-msg rejection, instruct to read the commitlint error, fix the message, and re-commit until it passes.
Trim the team-rollout/FAQ sections ('团队培训', '季度回顾', spacing convention Q&A) that restate general knowledge Claude already has.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient config dumps assume competence, but the team-rollout steps ('团队培训', '季度回顾') and the verbose commitlint prompt-message block add tokens Claude does not strictly need to execute. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready config files (commitlint.config.js, .versionrc.js, .husky hooks, lint-staged JSON) and concrete templates, not pseudocode. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Sequenced rollout steps exist, but the commit-msg hook gates commits yet no explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop is spelled out for a rejected commit, leaving the checkpoint implicit. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into 10 sections, but it is a single ~360-line monolith with full config dumps inline and no bundle reference files, so content that could be split is kept inline. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |