Content
75%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 overview with executable quick-starts, a clear endpoint-selection workflow, and a genuinely useful, one-level-deep reference bundle. Its main weaknesses are duplicated parameter-gating rules between the recommended-request section and Critical Pitfalls, and inline detail that overlaps the common-mistakes reference.
Suggestions
Deduplicate the parameter-gating rules: the maxAgeHours/published-date, category, and highlights rules appear in both the recommended-request section and Critical Pitfalls — state them once and cross-reference the other location.
Trim Critical Pitfalls to the pitfalls not already covered by references/common-mistakes.md, linking there for over-specification and parameter-shape corrections instead of restating them.
Add a minimal inline agent polling/status-check snippet (create run → poll until terminal status → read output) so the most complex workflow has executable guidance without opening the reference.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is dense and assumes Claude's competence — no concept tutorials or padding — but three rule blocks are stated twice: maxAgeHours/published-date rules (recommended-request section and Critical Pitfalls), category warnings, and highlights guidance. Not 3: there is no verbosity or explanation of known concepts, only trimmable duplication; not 5: the duplicated rule-blocks are more than trivial. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Quick Start provides copy-paste-ready Python, TypeScript, and raw HTTP examples for the common case, plus a concrete recommended JSON request. Not 5: only /search has inline executable code — agent polling, contents, and answer workflows are prose plus pointers to reference files. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The 9-item API Decision Workflow is a clear, sequenced routing tree anchored by 'Default to the search endpoint', and agent guidance includes an explicit checkpoint ('wait for a terminal status via polling or SSE and check how the run ended before reading output'). Not 5: no explicit inline error-recovery loop; recovery details are deferred to references. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | All 13 reference files exist, are one level deep, and are indexed in a topics table with well-signaled links — but Critical Pitfalls substantially duplicates the stated topic of references/common-mistakes.md ('Over-specification and parameter-shape corrections'), so content that belongs in a reference file is also inlined. Not 5 for that organization gap; not 3: structure and navigation are otherwise excellent. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |