I enjoyed our supervised enclosure-transfer session and wrote that the FR5 was straightforward to get going. Then a reader asked how I chose the fingers and made the trays. I chose neither. The demonstrator had fitted the tooling, prepared the sequence and laid out the samples before I arrived.
What I actually did was select between two prepared destinations, run the example and ask questions. That was a good experience. I want my review to say what was good without crediting myself with a setup I never performed.
Keep the positive observation, but put the preparation before the part you performed. Readers can learn that the supervised controls felt understandable without being told that independent tooling and setup were equally easy.
That distinction would help me. I don't mind buying help, but I want to know what help the reviewer had. A good demonstration can be worth describing without pretending it was an afternoon's independent integration.
Selected an existing destination, Gabriel. The two positions and their motions were already prepared. I did not teach either one; my original phrase 'changed the destination' made that sound more substantial than it was.
Include who prepared and recovered the samples between runs. Readers often notice the conspicuous gripper and miss the person keeping the input tray convenient. That work may matter more to their proposed day than selecting the destination.
Felix's question is useful scope, though I'd avoid turning the rewrite into a checklist of everything Bruno did not test. Describe the actual session clearly, with its important limits, and let it remain a first impression.
Sara, agreed. I would rather read a specific small experience than a grand review buried under so many caveats that I can't tell whether the person liked it.
Felix, no interrupted example. Mia, the demonstrator replenished and recovered the samples. I've put that before my description of the controls, with no claim about running a whole order alone.
The prepared destinations had names that matched the two trays, and I could tell which one was selected before starting. I liked asking for the alternate and seeing the expected tray used. Modest, but genuinely useful to a newcomer.
The preparation and your observation are now distinguishable. I would remove any setup-time implication unless you actually measured that work, rather than estimate it from how relaxed the demonstrator looked.
Revised review posted with the preparation first, the destination-selection detail and a note explaining the correction. No setup-time claim. Thanks Gabriel, one smaller verb made the account considerably more accurate without making it less positive.