Content
77%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 and well-sequenced with strong error handling, but it is verbose and duplicates three existing reference files without linking to them, undercutting progressive disclosure. Splitting the inline templates and topic recommendations into the bundled references would materially improve it.
Suggestions
Move the Step 3 output templates into references/output-templates.md and the Step 4 topic-specific recommendations into references/topic-recommendations.md, then link to them from the body instead of inlining — eliminating the duplication and using the existing bundle.
Replace the inline Step 2B round definitions with a pointer to references/deep-assessment-rounds.md, keeping only the scoring summary in the body to cut roughly 100+ lines.
Tighten redundant prose in the scoring and path-generation rules to reduce token load while preserving the concrete thresholds and dependency order.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~430-line body inlines full output templates and every topic×score recommendation that already exist as separate bundle files (references/output-templates.md, topic-recommendations.md, deep-assessment-rounds.md), so it is accurate and operational but heavily padded and could be tightened substantially; it is not a 1 because it avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready AskUserQuestion option sets with headers, exact scoring thresholds, full markdown output templates, per-topic tutorial links, key exercises, and "done when" criteria — fully executable guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear sequenced flow (Step 1 → 2A/2B → 3 → 4 → 5) with explicit branching, scoring rules, a dedicated Error Handling section, and a Validation triggering-test section; the task is non-destructive so the lack of a validate-checkpoint loop is acceptable. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Three reference bundle files exist whose content is duplicated inline, yet the body never signals or links to them (it only links to external tutorial dirs), so content that should be split is inline and present references are not surfaced; not a 3 because of this unused/mis-structured bundle, not a 1 because sections are well-organized rather than a monolithic wall. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |