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.
A well-structured, highly actionable testing skill with executable examples, a clear step sequence, and good reference split. Minor conciseness redundancy with the description and the absence of an explicit validate/fix feedback loop keep two dimensions at 4.
Suggestions
Remove the repeated control-frame opcode/close-code lists from the body since they already appear verbatim in the description, relying on the reference file for the full matrix.
Add an explicit validate-then-retry checkpoint (e.g., 'if a close code assertion fails, inspect the server shutdown path before re-running') to turn the test sequence into a feedback loop.
Trim editorial asides like 'not RFC 6455 itself, but field-tested practice' to keep the body token-lean.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly lean and code-driven, but re-lists control-frame opcodes and close codes already in the description and adds light editorializing ('not RFC 6455 itself, but field-tested practice') that could be trimmed. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready test code across ws/Playwright/websockets covering handshake, subprotocol, ping/pong, reconnect, and frame inspection, with the remaining matrix in a reference file. | 5 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps 1–6 are clearly sequenced with assertion-based checkpoints built into each test, but there is no explicit validate-then-fix feedback loop for the multi-step process. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Body is a concise overview that signals a single one-level-deep reference (references/websocket-test-recipes.md, a real file) for the close-code matrix and backpressure recipes, with content appropriately split. | 5 / 5 |
Total | 18 / 20 Passed |