Content
78%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 an efficient, actionable protocol with strong progressive disclosure and explicit validation checkpoints. The main gap is that the end-to-end execution sequence is interleaved across multiple prose sections rather than consolidated into a single ordered checklist.
Suggestions
Consolidate the full execution sequence into one numbered checklist (dispatch lanes → critic gates → blind packet → judge → root verification), keeping the constraint sections as supporting rules.
Dedupe the independence/fingerprinting rules stated in both "Non-negotiable rules" and "Runtime behavior" so each appears once.
Add a short "Outputs" checklist mapping each returned artifact to the validation command that gates it, making the verify-then-report order explicit.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes competence, but independence and fingerprinting concerns recur across "Non-negotiable rules" and "Runtime behavior", producing minor redundancy that could be tightened. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete executable commands with specific script paths and arguments (verify-evidence, validate-scorecard, validate-panel, build-blind-packet, verify-review-run) are provided, with only placeholder path tokens left to fill. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Explicit validation gates and feedback loops (critic PASS, root verification, bounded improvement sweep, stalled-agent recovery) are present, but the execution sequence is distributed across prose rather than one ordered checklist. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A concise overview points via clearly signaled links to seven one-level-deep reference files and five scripts, all verified to exist, with detail appropriately split out of the main file. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |