Content
85%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.
Highly actionable, well-sequenced instructions with built-in verification and error handling. The main gap is an unlinked reference file that breaks the progressive-disclosure chain.
Suggestions
Link references/circuit_schematic.md from the body (e.g. under a 'Schematic & Theory' pointer) so the bundled reference is discoverable and one level deep.
Consider trimming the Example section or collapsing it into the Core Procedure to remove the duplicated step enumeration.
Add a brief note on expected failure signals (e.g. bulb stays off despite correct wiring) to strengthen the error-recovery feedback loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Lean, sectioned, and free of over-explaining basic circuit concepts, but the Example section largely re-derives the Core Procedure with concrete values, adding mild redundancy. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides exact, copy-paste-ready 'connect' commands with placeholders and concrete object examples that fully cover the common conductivity-test case. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are clearly sequenced with an explicit verification checkpoint ('wait1', 'look around', check bulb on/off) and result-driven branching (blue/orange box), plus missing-component error recovery. | 5 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is well-organized into six sections, but the bundled references/circuit_schematic.md is never referenced or linked from the body, leaving an orphaned reference that is not clearly signaled. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |