Content
65%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-organized, largely actionable instruction set with concrete file conventions and thoughtful domain-specific rules (quiz answer symmetry, asset reuse, mission grounding). Its two real weaknesses are the absence of an explicit end-to-end session workflow and the fact that all three referenced format files are missing from the bundle, leaving the delegated detail unreachable.
Suggestions
Ship the referenced MISSION-FORMAT.md, RESOURCES-FORMAT.md, and LEARNING-RECORD-FORMAT.md bundle files (or inline minimal templates) — the body delegates to them but they are absent, breaking every external reference.
Add an explicit ordered session workflow (check/populate MISSION.md → gather resources → read learning records → pick a zone-of-proximal-development topic → reuse ./assets/ → author lesson → update records) ending with a checklist that the lesson meets the stated requirements.
Include one worked example (a short lesson skeleton or sample quiz question) and the specific CLI command for opening a lesson, instead of "run a CLI command".
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is well-sectioned and mostly prescriptive workspace-specific instruction (file layout, naming conventions, quiz rules, asset-reuse policy) that Claude does not already know. Minor over-explanation could be trimmed, e.g. "Failing to understand the mission will mean knowledge acquisition is not grounded in real-world goals. Lessons will feel too abstract. You will have no way of judging what the user should do next." and glosses on known learning-science terms like "Spacing (distributing practice over time)". Fits anchor 4 ("Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed"); not 5 because these rationale passages don't earn their tokens, and not 3 because the padding is limited rather than pervasive. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, executable guidance dominates: exact paths ("./lessons/", "./reference/*.html", "./learning-records/*.md"), naming conventions ("titled `0001-<dash-case-name>.md`, where the number increments each time"), and specific quiz construction rules ("each answer should be exactly the same number of words (and characters, if possible). Vary which position holds the correct answer"). Fits anchor 4 ("Mostly executable guidance... with minor gaps"); not 5 because there is no worked lesson/quiz example, no specific CLI command for "open the lesson file", and the format templates the body delegates to are missing from the bundle; not 3 because the guidance is far more concrete than incomplete. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A rough sequence is implied through scattered temporal markers ("your first job should be to question the user", "Before the RESOURCES.md is well-populated", "Before authoring a lesson, read ./assets/"), but no explicit ordered workflow is ever presented, and checkpoints are mostly implicit — only "Confirm with the user before changing the mission" is explicit, and there is no final check that a produced lesson meets the stated requirements. Fits anchor 3 (sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit); not 4 because the sequence must be synthesized by the reader rather than being clearly laid out, and not 2 because the section flow plus temporal markers do convey a usable order. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The design pattern is right — a clear overview with three well-signaled, one-level-deep reference links ([MISSION-FORMAT.md], [RESOURCES-FORMAT.md], [LEARNING-RECORD-FORMAT.md]) delegating bulky format specs — but scoring against the actual bundle shows none of these files exist (the bundle contains only SKILL.md), so every external reference is broken and the navigation leads nowhere. Falls between anchors 3 and 4: the structure and signaling are better than anchor 3 describes, but missing reference targets are a functional failure beyond anchor 4's "minor organization gaps". Scored 3 because the referenced content is unreachable as shipped. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |