Content
88%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.
A high-quality transactional workflow: executable, well-sequenced, and rich with validation and rollback feedback loops appropriate to a destructive update operation. The main slack is a few justifiable-but-optional explanatory asides that cost tokens.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean — dense bash commands and tight safety-contract bullets with little concept padding — but a few explanatory asides ('This is the self-update seam...', 'Do not depend on Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode...') could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Fully executable copy-paste bash throughout, with concrete subcommands (prepare/resume/validate/cutover/ack/finish/cleanup/rollback/prune) and explicit variable wiring covering the common cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clearly numbered 1–7 sequence with explicit validation checkpoints ('Stop if it prints anything', the validate step, 'Only phase: complete is success') and feedback loops for error recovery (rollback on build/health failure, fix-and-revalidate inside stageRoot). | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized into a safety contract plus seven headed sections with clearly signaled, one-level-deep references (e.g. docs/onecli-upgrades.md); no monolithic wall of text, though the single-file body is long for a complex transactional workflow. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |