Content
61%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 delivers a tight, actionable queue-draining workflow with useful safety notes, but it repeats the description verbatim across sections and lacks an explicit validation loop for a batch operation. The Example section is thin padding rather than a worked demonstration.
Suggestions
Replace the verbatim-description Example with a concrete worked example showing an actual frame_id, submit_token, and proposal_text including the PREDICT line.
Add an explicit validation/feedback step (e.g., confirm each submission's commitment id before proceeding to the next frame, and retry on error) to satisfy the batch-operation feedback-loop requirement.
Remove the duplicated description from the 'When to Use' section to tighten conciseness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The core numbered steps are lean, but the verbatim description is repeated in both 'When to Use' and the 'Example' section, adding padding that could be trimmed. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete commands (`acc frames`, `acc_act(runtime="continue", input={...})`) and a precise PREDICT suffix format, but the `...` placeholders keep it just short of copy-paste ready. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1-5 form a clear sequence with an idempotency note and a 'drain fully before new work' checkpoint, but this batch operation lacks an explicit validate/retry feedback loop, capping the score at 3. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A simple, well-sectioned body (When to Use, Example, Limitations) with no bundle files needed, but the near-empty Example section adds little organizational value. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 14 / 20 Passed |