Content
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is highly actionable and clearly sequenced with a real validation checkpoint, scoring well on actionability and workflow clarity. Conciseness and progressive disclosure are held to 2 by the duplicated extension-hook blocks and the monolithic structure lacking external references.
Suggestions
Deduplicate the extension-hook instructions: define the pre/after hook handling once and reference it from both Pre-Execution Checks and Step 9 to remove ~30 lines of redundancy.
Consolidate the two `$ARGUMENTS` blocks (User Input and Context) into a single user-input section to avoid repetition.
Extract the detailed hook output-format templates and detection-pass rules into a `references/` file and link to it, improving progressive disclosure and reducing the inline footprint.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly tight and assumes Claude's competence, but the extension-hook instructions are duplicated nearly verbatim in "Pre-Execution Checks" and Step 9 (~30 lines each), and `$ARGUMENTS` appears twice (User Input and Context); matches score 2 "Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened." Not a 3 due to the redundant hook blocks; not a 1 because most content is high-signal guidance rather than concept explanation. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Quotes like "Run `.specify/scripts/powershell/check-prerequisites.ps1 -Json -RequireTasks -IncludeTasks`" and the fully specified report table, severity heuristics, and detection categories give copy-paste-ready, executable guidance; matches score 3 "Fully executable code/commands; specific examples." Not a 2 because commands and output structure are concrete rather than pseudocode. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 9-step sequence is presented with an explicit validation/abort checkpoint in Step 1 ("Abort with an error message if any required file is missing") and a checklist-style structure; matches score 3 "Clear sequence with explicit validation steps... checklists for complex processes." Not a 2 because validation and ordering are explicit; the read-only nature means no destructive feedback loop is required. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well-organized, but the ~245-line body is monolithic with no bundle-file references and large inline hook-instruction blocks that could live in a separate reference; matches score 2 "Some structure but... content that should be separate is inline." Not a 3 because it exceeds the simple-skill threshold and offers no one-level-deep external references; not a 1 because section organization is clear rather than a wall of text. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |