Content
90%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 content is a strong, lean conventions reference: actionable commands and code examples, explicit validation checkpoints in its workflows, and clean section organization. The main gap is the absence of any progressive-disclosure split into separate reference files for the longer sections.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and token-efficient — terse imperatives, bullet lists, and no padding about what Excel/COM/MCP are — assuming Claude's competence so that nearly every token earns its place. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It provides copy-paste-ready commands (dotnet test with a concrete filter), a complete correct-vs-wrong C# example, specific assertion lists, and concrete file paths covering the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Sub-workflows like TDD (RED→implement→GREEN) and the numbered triage pattern have explicit validation checkpoints, but there is no single unifying end-to-end workflow with a full error-recovery feedback loop. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-organized with clear section headers and stays navigable as a single conventions doc, though at ~115 lines some sections (testing, triage, file structure) could be split into one-level-deep reference files that are not present. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |