Content
92%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A tight, highly actionable procedure with a clear sequence and built-in observation checkpoint. The one gap is progressive disclosure: an existing reference schematic is not surfaced from the body, so the wiring detail is duplicated inline rather than delegated.
Suggestions
Link the existing schematic from the body, e.g. "See [circuit_diagram.md](references/circuit_diagram.md) for the component list and connection map," and keep only the concise wiring sequence inline.
If the inline terminal-by-terminal wiring belongs in the schematic, move it there to avoid duplicating connection details across the body and the reference.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes competence: it gives the exact procedure and action names without explaining what a circuit or conductivity is, and every section earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully concrete, executable guidance — exact action names (focus, wait1, look around, teleport) and exact terminal-to-terminal wiring (e.g., "battery anode to orange wire terminal 1"), copy-ready for the environment. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The Core Procedure is a clearly numbered sequence with an explicit observe/classify checkpoint (wait, look around, then branch on bulb state) that acts as the validation step before sorting. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Sections are well-organized, but a bundle file (references/circuit_diagram.md) exists and is never linked or signaled from the body, leaving an orphaned reference and inline content that overlaps it. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |