Content
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is concise and well-structured with excellent progressive disclosure, but the routing workflow is abstract and lacks concrete executable guidance or validation checkpoints, capping actionability and workflow clarity at 2.
Suggestions
Make the "Execute" routing step concrete—describe what running the `create` subcommand actually does or show an example invocation instead of "Execute with remaining arguments".
Add a brief concrete example or snippet (e.g., a sample `slides create quarterly-review 10` call) to improve actionability.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and efficient with no conceptual padding—every section (When to Use, Subcommands, References, Routing) earns its place, matching the "lean and efficient" anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Routing steps are listed but abstract—"Execute with remaining arguments" is vague and there is no concrete executable code or command, fitting the "some concrete guidance but incomplete" anchor rather than fully executable. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The three-step routing sequence is present but the final "Execute" step is hand-wavy and lacks validation checkpoints, fitting the "steps listed but validation gaps" anchor. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Clear overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep references in organized tables, all of which resolve to real files, matching the "clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references" anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |