Content
72%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 well-structured, token-efficient overview that correctly defers implementation detail to a real, one-level-deep reference file. The main gaps are the absence of any explicit verification step in the body and a vague "use aria-live regions appropriately" check directive.
Suggestions
Add an explicit verification step to the body, e.g., "Verify: run axe/Lighthouse on the rendered state, then trigger the update with a screen reader to confirm the announcement" rather than deferring all verification detail to the reference.
Tighten the Check section from "use aria-live regions appropriately" to the specific checks (politeness level per use case, region in DOM before content changes, role=alert vs role=status).
Drop the opening why-it-matters sentence and the Explain section — both restate knowledge Claude already has and duplicate references/rule.md.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean: the Quick Reference bullets ("Use aria-live='polite' for non-urgent updates", "The live region must exist in DOM before content changes") earn their tokens. Not 5: the opening "Without live regions, screen reader users miss dynamic updates entirely" sentence and the Explain section restate concepts Claude already knows (and the opening is duplicated verbatim in references/rule.md). | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete attribute-level guidance throughout — politeness levels with use cases, "Use role='alert' or role='status' for semantic live regions", and the DOM-before-content rule give actionable direction, with examples one level deeper. Not 5: the Check directive "use aria-live regions appropriately" is soft and the body itself contains no good/bad markup example. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review sections form a coherent sequence, but validation is only gestured at ("note how to verify the fix with browser accessibility tooling or assistive tech"); no concrete verification step appears in the body — the actual verification steps live in references/rule.md. Fits anchor 3: sequence present, checkpoints missing or implicit. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A short, well-sectioned overview with a clearly signaled one-level-deep pointer — "For full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance, see `references/rule.md`" — and the reference file exists, is appropriately split (code examples, politeness table, verification), and contains no nested references. This matches the anchor-5 example structure. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |