Content
77%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 highly actionable and the multi-round workflow is sequenced with strong validation gates, but it is verbose (repeated blocks and inlined test specs) and monolithic with no bundle files to offload detail. Conciseness and progressive disclosure are the weakest dimensions.
Suggestions
Extract the four 'Acquittal Gate Test Specifications' into a references file (e.g. references/acquittal-tests.md) and reference it once, removing ~30 inlined lines.
Define the scope-limits block once in a shared/references file and include it by reference in both the medium prompt and the Round 2+ template instead of duplicating it verbatim.
Consolidate the repeated 'save the returned jobId and poll review_status until done=true' instruction into a single canonical snippet referenced from each call site.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient operational prose, but the scope-limits block is duplicated verbatim in two prompt templates, the 'save jobId / poll review_status' instruction repeats three times, and four inlined acquittal-gate test specs pad the file; it could be tightened noticeably, so it sits at the 'mostly efficient but some unnecessary content' anchor rather than 4. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready MCP call templates (review_start/reply_start/review_status) with full reviewer prompts, a concrete REVIEW_STATE.json schema, and an explicit /render-html command with flags, covering the medium/hard/nightmare and round-1/round-2+ cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear Initialization → Phase A–E → Termination sequence with explicit validation checkpoints (Stop-Evaluation Gate, acquittal gate, append-only integrity rules) and a review→fix→re-review feedback loop with error-recovery guidance, matching the top anchor; the destructive/batch cap does not apply because validation steps are present. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist (references/scripts/assets absent), so the ~500-line body is monolithic: the acquittal-gate test specs and the duplicated scope-limits block are inlined rather than split into referenced files, and while external shared-references links are signaled, content that should be separate is inline. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |