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 actionable with a clear, verified workflow and good reference signaling, but it is dragged down by a missing helper script that the whole workflow depends on and by an unnecessary translation-disclaimer block.
Suggestions
Add the missing 'scripts/new_notebook.py' (or fix the path) and list it in the reference map so the core tool is actually present and discoverable.
Remove the 'CO-OP TRANSLATOR DISCLAIMER' block and other duplicated template/script mentions to tighten token usage.
Add an explicit run->fix->rerun feedback loop in the verification step for when notebook execution fails.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The core body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (no explanation of what Jupyter is), but the trailing 'CO-OP TRANSLATOR DISCLAIMER' is unrelated padding and some template/script mentions are repeated, so it could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands — 'export JUPYTER_NOTEBOOK_CLI=...', 'uv run --python 3.12 python "$JUPYTER_NOTEBOOK_CLI" --kind experiment ...', and 'uv pip install jupyterlab ipykernel' — with concrete flags and output paths. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The six-step workflow is clearly sequenced and ends with an explicit verification step ('شغل الدفتر من الأعلى إلى الأسفل') plus a referenced quality checklist; the editing step includes safeguards for existing notebooks. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | There is a clear 'خريطة المراجع' with well-signaled one-level-deep references that all exist, but the body's central tool path 'scripts/new_notebook.py' (and $JUPYTER_NOTEBOOK_CLI) points to a scripts/ directory that does not exist, and the reference map omits scripts entirely — navigation to a core dependency is broken. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |