Content
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is highly actionable with a clearly sequenced, validated workflow and strong recovery guidance. Its main weaknesses are repetition that inflates token count and a monolithic structure that could split per-suite detail into reference files.
Suggestions
Reduce repetition by stating shared conventions once (e.g. 'all commands run from $EXAMPLE_DIR and use `2>/dev/null`') instead of repeating the cd path and redirect on every block.
Move the per-suite assertion details or the Known Issues section into a references/ file (e.g. KNOWN_ISSUES.md) and link to it, enabling progressive disclosure and a leaner SKILL.md.
Trim explanatory notes that restate command behavior (e.g. 'Wait for this to complete before proceeding.') where the next numbered step already implies sequencing.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient with concrete commands and minimal concept explanation, but it is repetitive (every command carries `2>/dev/null` and full `cd $IWSDK_REPO_ROOT/examples/physics` paths) and some notes could be tightened without losing clarity. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Fully executable `npx iwsdk ...` commands with exact `--input-json` payloads, specific assertions on named fields and values, and copy-paste-ready blocks per test. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear Step 1–5 sequence with explicit validation checkpoints (parse JSON, verify assertions before proceeding), early-exit branches (server failure → report FAIL and skip to Step 5), and a retry feedback loop in the Recovery section. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-sectioned but monolithic: the entire ~300-line procedure (5 suites, recovery, known issues) lives inline in SKILL.md with no references to separate files, and no bundle files are present to offload detail. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |