Content
81%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 tightly organized, highly actionable fix loop with strong validation and feedback structure — the main strength. The only gaps are a minor Rules/Pitfalls redundancy and a verify step that could show one concrete local command example.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean with no concept over-explanation and dense tables that earn their tokens; the only redundancy is minor overlap between the "Rules" list and the "Common Pitfalls" table. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | It provides copy-paste-ready gh commands (gh run view --log-failed, gh run list --json ...) and a signal→fix triage table, but the verify step defers to "the same command from the workflow YAML" rather than giving a concrete example. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear three-phase sequence with explicit validation checkpoints — local verify before commit, revert-and-retry on failure (max 3 attempts), and re-check CI with a loop back to Phase 1 — exactly the feedback-loop pattern the rubric rewards. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-sectioned and self-contained with no nested references and no need for external files, but at ~68 lines with inline triage/pitfalls tables it slightly exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill threshold that would auto-qualify for a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |