Content
80%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, well-structured, and actionable with concrete file names and an output contract. Its main gaps are the absence of validation checkpoints in the workflow and references to bundle files (LICENSE, template.json) that are not present.
Suggestions
Add a verification step to the workflow, e.g. after cloning, confirm assets/deck-stage.js resolves and keyboard navigation works before delivering the deck.
Ship the referenced ./LICENSE and template.json files in the bundle, or remove the links from 'Source & license' to avoid dangling references.
Condense step 1's 404 rationale into a one-line caution to tighten token use while preserving the actionable warning.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean, well-sectioned body with no concept explanation Claude already knows; each section (At a glance, Best/Avoid for, Workflow, Output contract) earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Concrete, copy-paste-ready guidance: named files (assets/deck-stage.js), explicit clone/replace/preserve steps, and a literal <artifact> tag output template. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Six steps are clearly sequenced, but there are no explicit validation or verification checkpoints, even around the asset-path and navigation-runtime cautions in steps 1 and 6. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized sections and one-level references, but cited files like ./LICENSE and template.json do not exist in the bundle, leaving dangling links. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |