It's still mostly just explaining what's happening, not the reasoning behind it or other options that could have been used. There were a few comments that started to go into it but for the most part it's just a better explanation of what you're seeing than we're used to. Don't just say x cleanly anti-airs y, say that x will beat anti-airs y, q, and r, but it loses to z, however z is risky to do because you can just do p which will lead to a big combo and if they predict p it just means you'll have to block.