Content
57%Reviews 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-structured, lean API overview with strong progressive disclosure and a clear default workflow. Its main weaknesses are redundant tables, absent inline executable examples, and implicit rather than explicit validation checkpoints.
Suggestions
Collapse the overlapping Tool Selection and Quick Reference tables into a single table to remove redundancy.
Add an inline executable example (e.g., a curl POST to /v1/video_agent/generate with a sample JSON body) so guidance is copy-paste ready.
Spell out the polling validation loop — expected status values, recommended poll interval, and how to handle a 'failed' status — as an explicit checkpoint in the Default Workflow.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence without explaining basics, but the Tool Selection and Quick Reference tables overlap, and the Reference Files section re-lists files already cited, so it could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives concrete MCP tool names, HTTP endpoints, and config params (duration_sec, orientation, avatar_id), but provides no inline executable code (curl/JSON), deferring the copy-paste-ready details to reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The Default Workflow offers clear numbered sequences for both MCP and direct-API paths with a poll step, but validation checkpoints (expected statuses, poll interval, error handling) are implicit rather than explicit. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is an organized overview pointing to ~20 real, one-level-deep reference files grouped into clear categories (Foundation, Core, Customization, Advanced, Integration) with markdown links, all of which exist on disk. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |