Content
86%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-structured and highly actionable, with a concrete JSON example, named commands, and clear sequencing. Minor room remains to tighten the opening/Why prose and to add an explicit error-recovery loop to the workflow.
Suggestions
Tighten the opening line and the "Why" section so the body leads with the actionable Quick start rather than restating the user's intent.
Add a short validate-fix-retry note to the workflow (e.g., what to do if memory_lesson_save is unavailable or rejects the content), turning step 6's veto into a fuller feedback loop.
Consider moving the confidence-decay mechanism detail out of "Why" or condensing it, since it explains system internals rather than guiding action.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient and assumes Claude's competence, but the opener ("The user wants a lesson recorded...") and some explanatory "Why" prose could be trimmed without losing actionable guidance. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides a copy-paste JSON example with all fields and realistic values, concrete confidence heuristics (0.7 / 0.5), named tool commands, and a Wrong/RIGHT contrast that fully specifies execution. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Six clearly sequenced steps with a veto checkpoint and a closing checklist, but there is no explicit error-recovery feedback loop; the save is a one-shot with confirmation rather than validate-fix-retry. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into focused sections with a single clearly-signaled one-level reference (../_shared/TROUBLESHOOTING.md) and a See-also list, giving easy navigation without nested references. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |