Content
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is a tight, well-structured overview that defers depth appropriately to a real reference file, with concrete check and fix guidance. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit validation/verification checkpoint in the body for a batch audit task.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and well-organized into tight sections (Quick Reference, Check, Fix, Explain, Code Review) with no padded library explanations or generic concept exposition beyond a brief, relevant framing sentence. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The Check and Fix sections give specific guidance and examples (CMS defaults, the '[Specific Topic] – [Site Name]' pattern), but executable specifics such as crawl tooling and code are deferred to references/rule.md rather than included. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review imply a loose sequence, but the body lacks an explicit numbered workflow or validation checkpoint for this batch audit operation; verification steps live only in the reference file. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview that clearly signals a single one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md'), and that file exists and holds the detailed implementation guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |