Content
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A well-organized, lean overview that uses progressive disclosure effectively and sequences its workflow with validation. The main gap is actionability: concrete code lives in reference files rather than inline in the body.
Suggestions
Add one short inline code snippet or copy-paste command in the Instructions (e.g., a minimal concurrency-limiter middleware) so the body is actionable without opening references.
Surface a quick-start example directly in the body and keep the deeper examples.md for variations, raising inline actionability.
Include a one-line validation command (e.g., a k6 invocation) in step 8 rather than only describing the load test to write.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it does not lecture on what circuit breakers or throttling are, and every section earns its place without padding. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The instructions give specific, concrete values (503, Retry-After, 5 failures in 10s, p95/p99, named X-Throttle headers), but the main body contains no inline executable code or commands — that detail lives in references — so it stops short of copy-paste-ready guidance. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | An 8-step numbered sequence with an explicit validation step (load tests verifying throttle engagement and recovery) plus an error-handling table providing feedback loops meets the highest anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a clear overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep references to real files (implementation.md, errors.md, examples.md), with content appropriately split across them. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |