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 tightly written, highly actionable debugging discipline with an explicit phased workflow and strong validation checkpoints. The main improvement room is splitting the long loop-construction list into a reference file and trimming rhetorical flourishes.
Suggestions
Move the ten 'Ways to construct a feedback loop' into a references file (e.g. references/feedback-loops.md) and summarize the top three inline, tightening progressive disclosure and conciseness.
Trim rhetorical emphasis lines like 'Be aggressive. Be creative. Refuse to give up.' to recover tokens without losing the directive tone.
Add one short concrete command example per loop type (e.g. a sample curl or pytest invocation) to lift actionability from mostly-executable to copy-paste ready.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, with no over-explanation of basic concepts; only minor motivational flourishes ('Be aggressive. Be creative.') could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides ten concrete feedback-loop constructions, explicit checklist criteria, a log-tag format ('[DEBUG-a4f2]'), and a real referenced script, though it is methodology rather than copy-paste code. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Six phases are clearly sequenced with explicit gates ('No red-capable command, no Phase 2'), validation checklists, and feedback loops for error recovery. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized phase sections with a clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference to scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh that exists in the bundle; minor organization gaps keep it below 5. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |