Content
75%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, actionable audit workflow with concrete commands, examples, and validation, consistently scoring 4 across dimensions with only minor trimming and checkpoint-placement gaps preventing top marks.
Suggestions
Tighten the explanatory sentence in step 1 ('This is the most complex part as _js can be assigned...') to a terse note, since the examples already convey the variability.
Add an explicit per-step or post-fix validation checkpoint (e.g. 're-run pnpm tsc and pnpm eslint until clean') to strengthen the feedback loop and lift workflow clarity toward 5.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean and action-oriented without explaining concepts Claude already knows; only minor over-explanation such as 'This is the most complex part as _js can be assigned...' keeps it just below 5. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete file paths, real _js example strings, executable commands (pnpm eslint/tsc/build), and template fixes with window.<name>=; the audit/search steps are guidance rather than fully copy-paste runnable, so not a 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear six-step sequence with an explicit validation step (step 6) and a fix loop, plus an Audit Goals checklist; validation is concentrated at the end and the retry loop is only lightly stated, leaving a minor gap below 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into clearly labeled sections with one-level-deep, clearly signaled references (core.instructions.md, wiki/Dev-UI.md); at ~115 lines with all content inline it is above the simple-skill threshold, so it does not reach 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |