Content
88%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.
An excellent operational skill: fully executable commands, explicit validation checkpoints and rollback paths, and lean assumption of competence. The only refinements are trimming the slight redundancy between the Safety contract and the numbered steps, and considering reference files for secondary detail.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body assumes Claude's competence (no git/worktree tutoring) and inline comments justify only non-obvious details like the macOS 'pwd -P' symlink trap, but the 'Safety contract' section partially restates the numbered steps, a minor redundancy that keeps it below anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Every step ships copy-paste-ready, fully executable commands with concrete flags, IDs, and even complete shell conditionals for remote selection and branch detection; the common cases are covered with no gaps. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly numbered 7-step sequence with a dedicated validation phase, explicit feedback loops ('Fix only failures caused by the staged update... commit the fix, and re-run validation'), user confirmation gating before destructive cutover, and rollback on health failure. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The single-transaction procedure is well sectioned and cohesive as inline content with no bundle files to navigate, but at ~270 lines some detail (channel rules, prune/rollback semantics) could be offloaded to clearly signaled reference files, keeping it below anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |