Content
81%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 and well-sequenced with strong validation and error-recovery guidance. Its main weakness is redundancy from the duplicated command block and minor boilerplate, which slightly undercuts conciseness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is mostly efficient, but the commit-specific command block is duplicated verbatim in both the 'Build the command' and 'Run the review in the background' sections, and the 'guidelines, not a rigid script' boilerplate could be trimmed. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | It provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready bash and heredoc snippets (git rev-parse validation, roborev review --wait) and concrete examples covering both default-HEAD and security-commit cases. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear five-step sequence is given with an explicit validation checkpoint (ref verification with exit on failure) and error-recovery guidance in step 4 for daemon/init failures. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The file is well-organized into clearly headed sections (Usage, Sandbox access, When NOT to invoke, Instructions, Examples, See also) with no nesting; no bundle files exist, so references are appropriately absent, though the single-file structure is dense. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |