Content
67%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 is highly actionable with executable Membrane CLI commands and a solid connect-to-ready workflow including error-recovery polling, but it is held back by redundant sections, inferable product prose, and the lack of concrete Teamgate-specific action examples.
Suggestions
Trim inferable context — the "Teamgate is a CRM software..." paragraph and the "so you can focus on the integration logic rather than auth plumbing" prose — and de-duplicate the `action list` command shared between "Searching for actions" and "Popular actions".
Replace the placeholder "Popular actions" discovery command with concrete Teamgate examples (e.g. create a lead, list deals, update a contact) so the common cases are covered end-to-end.
Label the post-connection step that "skip to Step 2" refers to, and add a brief validation note for action/proxy results (check the `output` field / HTTP status) to complete the workflow checkpoints.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | It includes unnecessary explanation Claude can infer (the "Teamgate is a CRM software... used by small to medium-sized businesses" paragraph, the "auth plumbing" prose) and duplicates the `action list` command across "Searching for actions" and "Popular actions", fitting anchor 3 (mostly efficient but with unnecessary explanation that could be tightened) rather than anchor 4 (only minor instances). | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | It provides many copy-paste-ready commands (`membrane connection ensure`, `npx @membranehq/cli connection get <id> --wait --json`, `membrane action run ... --input '...'`, `membrane request ...`) plus a full proxy-flag table, but `--intent "QUERY"` and the "Popular actions" section only show generic discovery rather than concrete Teamgate examples, fitting anchor 4 (mostly executable, minor gaps) and not anchor 5 (specific examples don't cover the common Teamgate cases). | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The connect-to-ready flow is well sequenced with a real feedback loop (poll `BUILDING` -> handle `CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED` -> user acts -> "poll again... to check if the state moved to READY" -> handle `CONFIGURATION_ERROR`), but "skip to Step 2" references an unlabeled step (the section is "1b") and running/proxy actions lack validation checkpoints, fitting anchor 4 (clear sequence, most checkpoints, minor gaps) rather than anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist; the single ~140-line file is organized into clear sections (Overview, Install, Authentication, Connecting, Searching, Popular actions, Proxy requests, Best practices) with no nested references, fitting anchor 4 (good structure, content appropriately placed) — not 5 because the simple-skill exception only applies under 50 lines and there are no one-level-deep external references. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 15 / 20 Passed |