Content
77%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 well-engineered orchestrator index: lean tables, concrete dispatch parameters, phase gates, and evidence pointers rather than re-taught concepts, with workflow clarity at the top of the scale. Its central weakness is that the thin-index design rests on rules/*.md and templates/*.md files that are not present in the bundle, which undermines both progressive disclosure and the completeness of the delegated phase procedures.
Suggestions
Ship the referenced bundle files: rules/divergence.md, rules/idea-scoring.md, rules/evolution-loop.md, rules/self-improvement-loop.md, rules/diagnostic-surface.md, and templates/ideation-report.md are cited but absent from the bundle, so the 'thin index' has no on-demand content to load — include them or inline the phase procedures.
Name the four scoring axes and the finalist admission bar inline in SKILL.md (currently only '4 independent axes' and 'the quality bar') so the Score and Validate phases stay actionable even when a rule file is unavailable.
Trim the redundancy between Core Principles and Anti-patterns (several entries restate the same rule negated) and shorten the subagent cost-expectation paragraph to a one-line table cell.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and assumes competence — mode/flag tables, numeric gates, and §-pointers to evidence instead of explanations. Minor redundancy (several Anti-patterns restate Core Principles in negated form; the subagent cost-expectation paragraph) keeps it below the 5 anchor's 'every token earns its place', but it is clearly above 3's 'unnecessary explanation'. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance throughout: exact memory.list payloads, burst configurations ("2 bursts × 8 ideas", "5 parallel persona subagents × 6 ideas"), explicit Skill() calls, and numeric gates (pool ≥ 12/≥ 25, ≤ 3 rounds, confidence ≥ 70). Not a 5 because key specifics — the four scoring axes and the finalist admission bar — are only gestured at ("4 independent axes", "the quality bar") and delegated to rules files that are absent from the bundle. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Phases 0–7 are sequenced in a table with an explicit per-phase Gate column, feedback loops are present (evolution "stopped on flat external scores, never on self-assessed improvement"; unsure-triage names an escalation path), and a Definition of Done checklist closes the loop — matching the 5 anchor's explicit validation steps and checklists. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The design is exemplary — a self-declared "thin index", a Contents nav, and one-level §-pointers into references/ideation-research.md, which exists and whose § headers match every citation. But scored against the actual bundle, 6 of the 7 referenced paths (rules/divergence.md, rules/idea-scoring.md, rules/evolution-loop.md, rules/self-improvement-loop.md, rules/diagnostic-surface.md, templates/ideation-report.md) are missing, so the on-demand files the whole structure depends on cannot be navigated to — beyond 4's 'minor organization gaps'. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |