CC nasa-se-expanded
Knowledge base from the Expanded Guidance for NASA Systems Engineering (NASA/SP-2016-6105-SUPPL, Volume 1, March 2016) — the practitioner-depth supplement to the NASA SE Handbook. Use for the load-bearing mechanics the handbook compresses: the SE Engine's per-phase cadence and the iterative-vs-recursive distinction, the AS9100 crosswalk, life-cycle tailoring vs. customization and the Compliance Matrix, the recursive system-design consistency loop (ConOps vs. Operations Concept, requirement flow/type/ownership, successive refinement), product realization (verify/qualify/accept/certify cardinality, protoflight, 'test the way we fly' coverage, two-form transition), and the crosscutting technical-management procedures (six-step scheduling, cost-estimating method selection, JCL, interface document family, RIDM/CRM, CM baselines, EVM arithmetic, MOE/MOP/KPP/TPM, the three required leading indicators, and the decision-analysis method catalog). This is the DEPTH layer — it deliberately does NOT restate the base definitions; pair it with the nasa-se-handbook pack. Scope: NASA space-flight SE practice (Vol 1 Practices); thin on the Vol 2 process-appendix detail, on non-NASA/commercial life cycles, and on software-engineering methodology.
Knowledge base from the Expanded Guidance for NASA Systems Engineering (NASA/SP-2016-6105-SUPPL, Volume 1, March 2016) — the practitioner-depth supplement to…
As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, failures and branches
How to improve
- Shorten the description to 1024 characters.
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitychapters/ch06-nasa-se-expanded-crosscutting-cm-data-assessment-decision.md:61Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (quoted — discussed, not commanded)The chapter's largest single body of depth is the catalog of life-cycle reviews and their roles. Reviews inform the **decision authority** about readiness to pass a **KDP** gate into the next phase. S
quoted
Files scanned: 12. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- error
description-longdescription is 1247 chars, limit 1024
Process rating: all ten parameters 62/100
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4547 tokens
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 58 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
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)
- +3Description length 1247: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 14 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 58 items
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 53.