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.
The body is a well-structured, actionable workflow with executable commands, explicit input validation, and error-recovery guidance. It is concise and appropriately self-contained, with only minor organization density in the Panels section.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence (no explaining what a code review is), with executable commands and tight sections; minor trims possible in the overlapping 'Explicit invocation only' and 'When NOT to invoke' sections. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides copy-paste-ready commands (roborev review --wait, the git rev-parse --verify validation snippet, heredoc commit ref) and concrete worked examples for the default-HEAD and security-review cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 4-step sequence (validate → run → present → offer next steps) with an explicit validation checkpoint (git rev-parse, 'do not proceed' on failure) and error-feedback loops that suggest roborev status/init on failure. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized single file with clear section headers and no need for external bundle files (none present); the somewhat dense Panels subsection keeps it just short of the 'perfectly split, easy navigation' anchor. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |