Content
42%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 well-organized and reasonably concise, but its instructions are too abstract to execute directly and it references a playbook file that is absent from the bundle.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable guidance—specific commands, log-query examples, or trace-tool invocations—instead of deferring all detail to the missing playbook.
Provide the `resources/implementation-playbook.md` file or remove the dangling reference so progressive disclosure is satisfied.
Insert explicit validation/feedback checkpoints (e.g., confirm reproduction, verify fix in staging before production) into the workflow steps.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient with tight bulleted instructions, but it repeats the frontmatter persona sentence verbatim and the Context section is prose that could be trimmed. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Instructions are high-level imperatives ("Gather error context", "Identify root cause and validate with evidence") with no concrete commands, tooling, or code; specifics are deferred to an external playbook. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear Gather→Reproduce→Identify→Propose sequence exists, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops, which matters for an incident skill that touches production. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Section structure is good and points one level deep to a playbook, but the referenced file `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist in the bundle, so the navigation is unsatisfied. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 11 / 20 Passed |