Content
57%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 concrete about state files and trigger words, but it depends on references/ and evals/ files that are absent, breaking both executable detail and the validation checkpoint. Workflows also lack explicit validation steps for state-mutating operations.
Suggestions
Add the missing references/evolution-protocol.md and references/platform.md (or inline the essential details) so deferred specifics are reachable.
Add explicit validation checkpoints to the startup and compaction-recovery flows (e.g. verify restored state before proceeding).
Provide the evals/test-no-telemetry.sh guard or reword the assertion so the validation step is real rather than a dangling reference.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean and table-driven, assuming Claude's competence; only the motivational epigraph ("今天最好的表现…这是机制") and the removed-features table add tokens that don't strictly earn their place in an overview. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Gives concrete specifics (named state files, exact dump fields, trigger-word table) but defers key implementation to references/platform.md and references/evolution-protocol.md, which do not exist, leaving real gaps. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The startup checklist and compaction-recovery flow are clearly sequenced, but validation checkpoints are implicit or missing, and the one cited guard (evals/test-no-telemetry.sh) is a dangling reference for batch/state-mutation operations. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections and one-level-deep reference signals are well organized, but the referenced references/*.md files do not exist, so the promised detail layer is not actually delivered. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |