Content
71%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 body is a tight, well-organized overview with concrete handoff shape, validation, and explicit failure-mode checkpoints, scoring well on conciseness, actionability, and workflow clarity. Progressive disclosure is the weakest dimension because the signaled reference files are missing from the bundle.
Suggestions
Add the missing references/ bundle files (workflow.md, contract.yaml, evals.yaml, task-profile.json) so the signaled one-level-deep references actually resolve.
Include a small worked routing example showing the full handoff object with populated fields to push actionability toward 5.
De-duplicate the "Read when" cues and the final "References" list to tighten conciseness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean, well-sectioned content where most lines earn their place without explaining concepts Claude already knows; minor redundancy between "Read when" and the "References" list keeps it just below a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete handoff object fields, an executable validation command, and mapped routing examples give mostly executable guidance; the absence of a worked handoff-object example is the main minor gap. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequence (route first, execute second) with explicit fail-fast validation and a stop-and-ask checkpoint on ambiguity; the core routing protocol lives in a one-level-deep reference rather than being fully inlined, leaving a minor gap. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well structured as an overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep references and "Read when" navigation, but the referenced bundle files (references/workflow.md, contract.yaml, evals.yaml, task-profile.json) do not actually exist, so the references are dead. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |