Content
72%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, single-file operations reference with fully concrete tool-call examples for every operation, so actionability and structure are strong. Weaknesses are the off-topic Model Routing section (generic harness knowledge padding token budget) and the absence of any operational workflow or validation guidance around destructive operations like wiki_delete.
Suggestions
Trim or remove the Model Routing section's generic delegation explanation, keeping at most a one-line model recommendation table — it is not wiki-specific and inflates token cost.
Add brief validation guidance for destructive/batch operations, e.g. run wiki_read before wiki_delete to confirm the target page, and suggest a periodic wiki_lint cadence after ingest operations.
Add one or two lines sequencing the operations (query before answering, ingest after significant discoveries, lint on demand) so a reader knows when each applies.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The operations, categories, storage, and constraints sections are lean, but the Model Routing section spends seven lines on generic delegation behavior ('The session model chosen with /model applies to the main loop only...') that is harness knowledge rather than wiki-specific instruction, plus a throwaway 'Inspired by Karpathy's LLM Wiki concept'. Mostly efficient but includes unnecessary explanation that could be tightened — fits anchor 3 better than anchor 4's 'minor instances'. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Every operation has a concrete, complete invocation with realistic parameter values — wiki_ingest({ title: "Auth Architecture", tags: ["auth"], category: "architecture" }), wiki_query({ query: "authentication", tags: ["auth"] }), wiki_lint(), wiki_add, wiki_list, wiki_read, wiki_delete. These are copy-paste ready and cover all documented operations, matching the anchor 5 example's completeness. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Operations are individually documented but never sequenced into a workflow (e.g. when to ingest vs quick-add, when lint runs, how cross-references get created), and wiki_delete is a destructive operation with no validation or confirmation guidance, which caps workflow clarity at 3 per the feedback-loop rule. Not score 2 because each operation's steps are concrete and the query section does specify the synthesis loop ('YOU synthesize answers with citations from the results'). | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A single self-contained file with clear section headers (Operations, Categories, Storage, Cross-References, Auto-Capture, Hard Constraints), no nested references, and no bundle files to navigate — everything is one level deep and easy to scan. The content is compact enough that no material belongs in a separate reference file. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |