Content
82%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 content is a strong, token-efficient overview: executable commands cover the common cases, the workflow is sequenced with review/promotion checkpoints, and heavy detail is correctly deferred to a real reference file and script. Minor gaps are the repetitive command examples, an implicit rather than explicit output-validation step, and an unlabeled reference entry.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean — short Overview, When to Use, Prerequisites, Output, and Workflow sections with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. It stops short of a 5 because the Quick Commands section repeats the same script invocation four times with only flag differences, which could be condensed into one command plus a flag annotation. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | The Quick Commands section provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready invocations with real paths and flags (--tickets-dir, --hints, --promote-hints, --max-synthetic-ratio, --overlap-threshold, --no-dedup) covering the common cases, and the workflow names the exact script to run. This matches the 5 anchor's "fully executable; copy-paste ready code or commands; specific examples cover the common cases". | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The five-step workflow is clearly sequenced, names the script, and includes review checkpoints (dedup with a containment threshold in step 4, "Review concepts and promote only high-support concepts" in step 5). It does not reach 5 because there is no explicit validation of the generated edge_concepts.yaml against the documented schema (references/concept_schema.md) before promotion — the checkpoint is implicit in "review". | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well organized into focused sections and pushes detail out appropriately: the 854-line script and the YAML schema live in scripts/ and references/concept_schema.md respectively, both real files referenced one level deep. It falls short of 5 because the Resources entry for references/concept_schema.md is a bare path with no label describing when to consult it, a minor navigation gap. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |