Content
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a lean, well-structured overview that defers detail to a single verified reference, with concrete actionable Check/Fix guidance; its main gap is the absence of an explicit post-fix verification checkpoint.
Suggestions
Add an explicit verification step after Fix, e.g. re-parse the regenerated sitemap to confirm no <loc> hostname/protocol mismatches remain before resubmitting.
Include a one-line validation command or check that the resubmitted sitemap's coverage report reflects the corrected URLs.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and well-organized, states the rule without explaining basic SEO concepts, and defers full detail to the reference, so every token earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The Check and Fix sections give concrete, copy-applicable guidance (parse all <loc> values, extract protocol and hostname, flag mismatches, require every URL to start with the canonical host, regenerate and resubmit), satisfying the instruction-only carve-out despite no inline code. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The Check -> Fix -> Explain -> Code Review sequence is present, but the post-fix verification checkpoint (confirm resubmitted sitemap reports correct coverage) is only implicit in the body, so it sits at 'steps listed but validation gaps'. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview with a single, clearly-signaled, one-level-deep reference to references/rule.md (verified to exist), giving easy navigation and an appropriate content split. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |