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.
A lean, well-structured overview with excellent progressive disclosure — a short body pointing to a verified, one-level-deep reference file. However, the Quick Reference section is redundant padding, the Fix step lacks any named modern equivalents or commands, and verification is only gestured at, leaving the workflow checkpoints implicit.
Suggestions
Replace the redundant Quick Reference bullets (which restate the intro and Fix sections) with a concrete list of deprecated roles and their modern replacements, e.g., a mapping table or a grep command like `grep -rnE 'role="(directory|...)"'`.
Name specific modern equivalents or native elements in the Fix section so the guidance is executable rather than 'update to modern recommended equivalents'.
Add an explicit validation checkpoint, such as re-running the search after fixes or verifying with a concrete accessibility tool (e.g., axe DevTools), instead of the implicit 'note how to verify the fix'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is short, but the 'Quick Reference' bullets — 'Deprecated ARIA roles should be replaced with modern equivalents', 'Browsers may drop support for deprecated roles in future versions', 'Ensures long-term compatibility with assistive technologies' — merely restate the intro and the Fix section, and the opening sentence explains a consequence Claude can infer. Not 4 because the Quick Reference section is entirely redundant; not 2 because there is no lengthy explanation of concepts Claude already knows. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Some concrete guidance exists — 'Search the codebase for deprecated ARIA roles like `directory` or abstract roles' gives a concrete search target — but key details are missing: the Fix section says 'Update deprecated ARIA roles to their modern recommended equivalents' without naming any equivalents, and there is no enumeration of deprecated roles, command, or code example in the body. Not 4 because the guidance is not mostly executable; not 2 because the Check step does give a specific, searchable example. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear sequence exists (Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review) with labeled sections, but validation is only implicit: 'note how to verify the fix with browser accessibility tooling or assistive tech' gestures at verification without any concrete checkpoint or tool. Not 4 because checkpoints are mentioned but not defined; not 2 because the sequence is present and steps are reasonably defined. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview that cleanly delegates detail through a well-signaled, one-level-deep pointer: 'For full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance, see `references/rule.md`'. The reference file exists and is self-contained (48 lines, no nested references), so navigation is easy and the split is appropriate. This matches the top anchor; no minor organization gaps were found. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |