Content
70%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.
A well-sequenced orchestration recipe with concrete subagent invocation templates, explicit validation gates, and revision feedback loops. Its main weaknesses are duplicated content across modes and steps, and a fully monolithic structure with no bundle references, both of which cost tokens without adding guidance.
Suggestions
De-duplicate the repeated Re-validation paragraph (Steps 5 and 10) into a single shared section referenced by both loops.
Move the fullstack 7a/7b prompt templates into a one-level-deep reference file (e.g. references/fullstack-templates.md) and keep only the mode-selection logic inline.
Define the derived variables ($PRD_UNIT_COMBINED_RELATED_FILES, $DESIGN_DOC_UNIT_INVENTORY) once where the join/merge rules are stated, so every invocation template is fully derivable.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but is noticeably repeatable: the "Re-validation" paragraph appears verbatim in both Step 5 and Step 10, and the 7a/7b prompt blocks largely duplicate the standard-mode Step 7 template; meta-boilerplate ("Core Identity: 'I am an orchestrator.'") adds tokens. This fits 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than anchor 4's 'minor instances'. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete Agent invocation templates give exact subagent_type values, descriptions, and prompt blocks with placeholder-passing rules ("copy the named source values into the exact fields... invoke immediately"), which is mostly executable guidance. Not 5 because several variables ($PRD_UNIT_COMBINED_RELATED_FILES, $DESIGN_DOC_UNIT_INVENTORY) are referenced without explicit derivation rules. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Phases and steps are clearly sequenced with explicit verification gates ("blocked... → correct the invocation/input and rerun"), conditional revision, re-validation feedback loops, per-unit Unit Completion checklists, and an error-handling table. This matches the anchor 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery; checklists'. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are all absent), so the entire ~400-line recipe is inline. Sections are well-organized, but the duplicated fullstack prompt templates and repeated re-validation prose are content that could be split into one-level-deep reference files. Anchor 3 fits better than 4, which expects references to be present and mostly clear. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |