Content
93%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 lean, concrete, and well-structured with copy-paste-ready verification commands and a clear procedure. The only gap is the absence of an explicit error-recovery feedback loop for the batch 4-file operation, which holds workflow clarity at 4.
Suggestions
Add an explicit feedback loop after the parity checklist (e.g. 'If any grep shows a mismatch, re-author the section in README.ko.md, re-derive the affected locale, and re-run the checklist').
Make step 4's validation self-contained rather than deferring to 'below' by naming the checklist as the gate before returning.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The ~88-line body is lean and dense, explaining no common concepts (what a README or markdown is) and keeping every section operational; padding is negligible. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready grep commands with exact patterns, an exact label set, a verbatim-preservation list, and a concrete anti-patterns table covering the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear numbered procedure with an explicit 'Verify parity ... before returning' checkpoint and a full checklist, but the batch/parallel 4-file operation is missing an explicit error-recovery feedback loop (re-author ko and re-derive if counts differ). | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A self-contained, well-organized overview with no nested references; the single Skill(...) pointer and the history-only report path are one-level-deep and clearly signaled. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |