Content
35%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 persona document: an exhaustive catalog of capabilities, traits, and knowledge areas that assumes Claude needs to be told what a business analyst knows, followed by vague instructions and an abstract 8-step response flow. It provides almost no executable guidance, and its one pointer to deeper material references a file that is missing from the bundle.
Suggestions
Cut the Capabilities/Behavioral Traits/Knowledge Base catalogs down to a short differentiating summary (or move them to a reference file), keeping only guidance Claude could not produce on its own.
Add concrete, executable artifacts: a KPI-framework template, a dashboard-design checklist, an example churn-analysis workflow with actual SQL/Python, or a sample deliverable structure.
Either create `resources/implementation-playbook.md` with the promised detailed examples or remove the reference — as written it points to a file that does not exist in the bundle.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Roughly 150 lines are capability/trait/knowledge bullet lists enumerating things Claude already knows ("Advanced dashboard creation with Tableau, Power BI, Looker", "A/B testing design, execution, and analysis", "Data governance frameworks and implementation") — heavily padded with no added instruction. It is not a 1 because it enumerates rather than explains known concepts in prose, but every major section is padding. | 2 / 5 |
Actionability | Guidance is limited to high-level hints: "Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs", "Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes" — no code, commands, templates, or worked examples anywhere. Not 1 because the Instructions and Response Approach sections do give some direction; not 3 because nothing is concrete enough to execute. | 2 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The "Response Approach" provides a numbered 8-step sequence ("Define business objectives" through "Plan for ongoing monitoring"), but the steps are abstract and validation checkpoints are only implicit ("Validates assumptions through data-driven testing" appears as a trait, not a step). Not 4 because no step includes a concrete checkpoint or verification action. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body has clear section headers, but the ~150-line capability catalog is inlined content that belongs in a separate reference file, and the only reference — "open `resources/implementation-playbook.md`" — points to a file that does not exist in the bundle. Not 4 because the single reference is dead and the bulk content is inline; not 2 because section structure is present and navigable. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 10 / 20 Passed |