BB checking-for-understanding-protocol-designer
Design a checking-for-understanding protocol with specific techniques for each lesson stage. Use when planning systematic comprehension checks during explicit or direct instruction.
Design a checking-for-understanding protocol with specific techniques for each lesson stage.
As a process B 79/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: progress reporting
How to improve
For the model run — optional
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "effort" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "skill_id" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "skill_name" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "domain" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "evidence_strength" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "evidence_sources" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "input_schema" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "output_schema" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "chains_well_with" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "teacher_time"
Process rating: all ten parameters 79/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 21 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3997 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 181: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 13 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 21 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.