Content
65%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is highly actionable with complete YAML examples and clear section structure, but it carries a heavy inline JSON schema dump and lacks validation/verify steps in its workflow. Splitting the schema into a reference file and adding a verification step would materially improve it.
Suggestions
Move the raw JSON schema into a separate reference file (e.g. references/explore-schema.yaml) and link to it, keeping the body as an overview.
Add an explicit validation/verification step to the development workflow, such as how to confirm the explore resource resolves or displays correctly after editing.
Consolidate the annotated and minimal examples to reduce repetition, or clearly label the minimal one as the recommended starting point to tighten token use.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body avoids concept-explaining fluff and stays mostly lean, but pastes a large raw JSON schema inline and repeats similar YAML across the annotated and minimal examples, which could be tightened or externalized. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides multiple complete, copy-paste-ready YAML examples (inline explore, full annotated example, minimal example) with per-property explanations, giving concrete executable guidance for authoring explore dashboards. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Development approach' section offers a numbered sequence (reference metrics view, select dimensions/measures, configure defaults) plus inline-vs-separate guidance, but there are no validation checkpoints or verify steps, leaving the sequence checkpoint-free. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are clearly organized, but the full raw JSON schema is dumped inline in the body rather than split into a separate reference file, and no bundle files (references/scripts/assets) exist to house such reference material. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |