Content
81%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.
A highly actionable, well-sequenced multi-phase workflow with strong validation feedback loops; the main gap is mild verbosity from restated principles and large inlined templates that could live in reference files.
Suggestions
Consolidate the four principles so they appear once (either Overview or Key Rules) rather than restated in both sections to reduce token overhead.
Move the full ~85-line proposal template and ~70-line reviewer prompt into reference files (e.g. references/proposal-template.md, references/reviewer-prompt.md) and link to them from the body.
Trim the exhaustive per-field proposal template to the essential structure, leaving field-level detail to a reference, to improve conciseness without losing actionability.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient operational guidance, but the four principles are stated in Overview and restated in 'Key Rules', and the ~85-line proposal template and ~70-line reviewer prompt are exhaustive; some tightening is possible. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable: concrete spawn_agent/send_input blocks with model, reasoning_effort, and verbatim message text, plus exact file paths, checkpoint JSON, and fill-in markdown templates. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Phases 0-5 are clearly sequenced with checkpoint recovery, an explicit STOP CONDITION, anchor/simplicity checks, and a review->revise->re-evaluate feedback loop with error recovery guidance. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Clear section structure with well-signaled one-level-deep references to shared-references via markdown links, though the large reviewer-prompt and proposal-template blocks are inlined rather than split into separate files. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |