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 concise, actionable, and clearly sequenced, with a concrete worked example. Its main weakness is progressive disclosure: the body duplicates (in abbreviated form) content that exists in references/living_indicators.md and never points to either bundle reference file, one of which (action_sequences.md) is an empty stub.
Suggestions
Replace the inlined animal/egg/plant indicator lists in 'Identify Candidates' with a pointer to references/living_indicators.md (e.g., 'See [living_indicators.md](references/living_indicators.md) for the full taxonomy, parsing rules, and room-likelihood table'), keeping only a few illustrative examples inline.
Reference references/action_sequences.md from the workflow or remove it — it currently contains only a heading ('Basic Identification Flow') with no content, so it adds no value as shipped.
Add a lightweight validation step to the workflow, e.g., check the response after `focus on [IDENTIFIED_OBJECT]` and re-identify or teleport to another room if the target was not accepted.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes competence — e.g., "**Focus on Target:** `focus on [IDENTIFIED_OBJECT]` to signal task progress" — with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows and no padding, matching the score-5 anchor; the only quibble is the near-duplicate of "signal task progress" in the notes, which does not reach the score-4 anchor's 'several unnecessary explanations'. | 5 / 5 |
Actionability | Concrete, directly executable commands appear throughout ("`look around`", "`teleport to outside`", "`focus on dove egg`", "`pick up dove egg` then `move dove egg to blue box`") and the worked example covers the common case end-to-end, matching the score-5 'copy-paste ready, specific examples cover common cases' anchor. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | The four-step Core Workflow is clearly sequenced and includes a fallback ("If the current room lacks candidates, `teleport to` rooms with higher biological likelihood"), but there is no validation checkpoint confirming that `focus on` succeeded before proceeding, matching the score-4 'most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps' anchor rather than score 5's explicit validation steps. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | The bundle contains references/living_indicators.md (an expanded indicator taxonomy with parsing rules and room likelihoods) and references/action_sequences.md, but the body never references either file and instead inlines its own shorter indicator lists, matching the score-3 anchor ('content that should be separate is inline' / references not clearly signaled). It is not score 4 because the existing references are entirely unsignaled rather than 'mostly clear', and not score 2 because the inlined content is brief and the sections themselves are well organized. | 3 / 5 |
Total | 17 / 20 Passed |