Content
85%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 well-structured, actionable audit procedure with explicit validation checkpoints and clean sectioning. Its main weakness is mild redundancy between the goals/reporting/output sections that could be consolidated for token efficiency.
Suggestions
Merge 'Reporting Format' and 'Output Expectations' into a single 'Reporting' section to eliminate restated content.
Trim the 'Audit Goals' section so it only states criteria not already covered step-by-step in 'Procedure'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (no concept explanations, direct commands), but the 'Reporting Format' and 'Output Expectations' sections largely restate each other and 'Audit Goals' overlaps the 'Procedure', so it could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives concrete executable commands (`pnpm eslint`, `pnpm tsc`, `pnpm build`), specific file paths, literal `_js=` pattern examples, and copy-paste-ready fix declarations. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A six-step numbered procedure is clearly sequenced, and step 6 provides an explicit validation/feedback loop (run typecheck/lint/build and fix issues that arise). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized into clearly labeled sections with a single one-level-deep pointer (`core.instructions.md`); no monolithic wall or nested reference chains, and no skill bundle files are needed. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |