Content
92%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 tight, actionable workflow with explicit validation checkpoints and a real bundled script for the heavy lifting. Its only weakness is mild command repetition between the Workflow and Commands sections.
Suggestions
Remove the duplicated summary and --file command blocks from the Commands section, or consolidate Workflow and Commands so each invocation appears once (the Commands section can then focus only on the additional flags like --all, --json, --context).
Consider a one-line pointer to the script's --help or a brief note that --all/--json/--context exist, rather than re-listing the base invocations.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean and efficient with no over-explanation of git concepts, but the Commands section repeats the summary and --file invocations already shown in the Workflow, which is minor padding. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands covering the common cases — summary, single-file, --all, --json, and --context/--max-lines tuning — with concrete git checkout commands for resolution. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear five-step sequence with explicit validation (step 5: ensure no unmerged paths, no markers, run tests, stage) and a re-check feedback loop (step 4), satisfying the destructive/batch validation requirement. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into Overview/Workflow/Commands/Notes sections with the heavy extraction logic delegated one level deep to the bundled scripts/extract_conflict_context.py (verified present), keeping the body a lean overview. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 19 / 20 Passed |