Content
86%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 lean, well-structured by track, and action-packed with executable commands, plus a validation checkpoint after training changes. Minor placeholders and a few tracks without explicit validation loops keep actionability and workflow clarity just below the top anchor.
Suggestions
Replace the '<N>' epochs placeholder in Track B with a concrete default or guidance on choosing the value.
Add an explicit validation/eval checkpoint (e.g., run eval-wiflow.js and confirm PCK@20) at the end of each training track, not just the global validation section.
Surface the expected output or success signal for commands like --build-index env and publish-huggingface so Claude knows when a step succeeded.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean track-organized body with no concept explanations Claude already knows; every section earns its place and assumes competence. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable cargo/python/node/gcloud commands per track that are largely copy-paste ready, with only minor gaps such as the '<N>' epochs placeholder in Track B. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Multi-track processes are sequenced with numbered steps (Track B) and a dedicated validation section ('cargo test --workspace', 'verify.py' VERDICT: PASS, handoff to ruview-verify); checkpoint framing is strong though a couple of tracks lack explicit validation feedback loops. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | A clear overview split into well-signaled tracks with one-level-deep references to ADR docs and scripts; no bundle files are present, and the body is appropriately organized for navigation. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |