Content
57%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 gives concrete, executable commands and covers detection, override, per-context behavior, and learnings, but it is padded with duplicated command listings and redundant mock-banner examples, and buries its one true workflow implicitly across sections. There are no bundle files, so all detail lives inline and one cited reference path is dangling.
Suggestions
Collapse the 'Override Commands' section and the 'Override Command Reference' table into a single command table, and trim the banner mockups to one short example — they restate what 'How Auto-Detection Works' already specifies.
Make the override workflow one explicit numbered sequence (confirm misdetection via the banner → run /octo:km on or off → run /octo:km to verify the override took effect) instead of leaving it implicit across example dialogues.
Move the worked auto-detection examples and the learnings schema/budget rules into a references/ file (e.g., LEARNINGS.md), and remove or fix the dangling `skills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md` reference since no bundle file exists.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The override commands are stated twice (the 'Override Commands' section and again in the 'Override Command Reference' table), and the four extended auto-detection examples plus banner mockups restate the same behavior already covered by 'How Auto-Detection Works'. It is mostly useful material with clear tightening opportunities, matching anchor 3 rather than anchor 4. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete slash commands (/octo:km on/off/auto), a real file path (.claude-octopus/learnings/<date>-<summary>.json), a complete JSON example for learnings, and specific budget numbers give mostly executable guidance. Minor gaps — e.g., it is never stated who/what actually writes and prunes learning files — keep it below anchor 5. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The core loop (detection is wrong → issue override → check status) is demonstrated only implicitly across separate sections and dialogue examples rather than as one explicitly sequenced procedure with a verification checkpoint. The sequence is present but checkpoints are implicit, matching anchor 3; no destructive or batch operations exist that would cap the score. | 3 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-sectioned but is a single ~230-line file inlining content that belongs in reference files (the four worked examples, the learnings schema and budget rules). It also cites `skills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md`, which does not exist in the bundle — a dangling, unclearly-signaled reference. This fits anchor 3's 'some structure but could be better organized' rather than anchor 4's 'references mostly clear'. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |