Content
81%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 content is a well-structured, highly actionable orchestration workflow with strong validation and feedback loops; its main weakness is verbosity, with a long, repetitive post-build checklist that could be trimmed or externalized.
Suggestions
Consolidate the repeated 'send the owning screen back for self-QA / in-place repair' guidance into one stated rule instead of restating it across many post-build bullets.
Move the lengthy per-check QA rationale into QAChecks.md (or a dedicated reference) and keep only the decision rule inline to reduce body length.
Tighten verbose phrasing like 'This costs one cheap turn. The defects these checks catch ...' to a single clause; the operational rule already earns its place.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is densely operational and largely free of generic concepts Claude already knows, but it is long and repetitive — the post-build QA/checklist block reiterates 'send the screen back' guidance many times and could be tightened without losing clarity. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Highly actionable throughout: exact tool calls (sync_canvas, compile_canvas, describe_control), absolute file paths, a copy-paste builder invocation template, and one-for-one verification steps that cover the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly sequenced multi-step process (workspace → route → planned handoff → shared invariants) with explicit validation checkpoints (compile after each wave), feedback loops (re-invoke planner, in-place repair), and detailed checklists; validation is abundant so no destructive/batch cap applies. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Branch detail is delegated to clearly signaled one-level-deep references (CreateWorkflow.md, EditWorkflow.md, QAChecks.md, ValidationWorkflow.md), but no local bundle files exist and the main body remains very long, so some inline detail (e.g. the QA checklist) could arguably live in a reference. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |