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 a well-structured overview with exemplary progressive disclosure — a real, well-matched one-level-deep reference. But it loses points on redundancy (the same guidance repeated across Quick Reference, Check, Fix, and Explain sections) and on actionability, since the concrete examples and verification steps live entirely in the reference file while the body's own guidance stays abstract.
Suggestions
Merge the overlapping Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections — the generic-phrase list and screen-reader explanation each appear twice — into a single Check-then-Fix flow to eliminate duplication and tighten token efficiency.
Add one compact before/after example in the body (e.g. 'click here' → 'View pricing plans') so the core guidance is actionable without opening references/rule.md.
Turn the verification mention into an explicit step, e.g. 'Verify: open the browser accessibility tree and confirm each link's accessible name is understandable out of context', to close the workflow-clarity validation gap.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is short but duplicates itself: the generic-phrase list ('click here', 'read more', 'learn more') appears in both Quick Reference and Check, and the screen-reader navigation explanation appears nearly verbatim in both the intro paragraph and the Explain section. More than minor trimming is needed, but it is not padded with background Claude already knows. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Names concrete specifics (aria-label/aria-labelledby, file type and size for downloads, specific banned phrases), but the body contains no before/after examples of good vs. bad link text and 'Check that screen readers can understand link purpose out of context' has no operationalized method — all executable examples are delegated to references/rule.md. | 3 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A rough sequence exists (Quick Reference → Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review), but verification is only implicit ('note how to verify the fix with browser accessibility tooling or assistive tech' is a mention, not a step), and the Check and Code Review sections overlap without delineating when each applies. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A concise, well-sectioned overview with one clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference ('For full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance, see references/rule.md') — the referenced file exists and contains exactly what is promised (code examples, patterns, verification steps). | 5 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |