Content
80%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 tight, actionable instruction set for a simple config mutation, well-organized and token-efficient. Its main weakness is workflow clarity: a destructive config edit with only an implicit validation directive and no explicit verify checkpoint, which the rubric caps at 3.
Suggestions
Add an explicit validation step in the workflow, e.g., re-read ~/.pua/config.json after editing to confirm offline=true and feedback_frequency=0 are set and other fields are preserved.
Make the edit command copy-paste ready (e.g., a concrete jq/python snippet to patch the JSON while preserving unknown fields) to lift actionability to 5.
State the condition for reporting success explicitly (verify the config change before emitting [PUA OFFLINE]) so the validation loop is unambiguous.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and efficient — it gives the exact config fields and values (offline=true, feedback_frequency=0), the preservation rule, and the report token, with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | It provides concrete, field-level guidance (specific keys, values, and the [PUA OFFLINE] output token) plus the file-preservation behavior, but lacks a literal copy-paste command, matching the 'mostly executable guidance with minor gaps' anchor rather than a fully copy-paste ready 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The sequence (set config -> report) is present and there is a verification directive ('Do not claim completion without command/output evidence'), but there is no explicit validation checkpoint in the workflow, and because this mutates a config file destructively the rubric's feedback-loop cap limits workflow clarity to 3. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | At under 50 lines with no bundle files and a clear heading plus two well-organized instruction paragraphs, this matches the simple-skill exception where progressive disclosure scores 5 with just well-organized sections. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |