BD master-curriculum
Use when user asks for a sequenced learning path within a Buddhist tradition — 学修次第, 先学什么, 从哪入门, 下一步读什么, curriculum, 学习计划, 路径推荐. Differs from /compare-masters (parallel opinion) and /master-debate (adversarial dialectic) by being 纵向 / 时序: stage-by-stage plan keyed on tradition × level (L0-L3) → foundation → intermediate → advanced + blind spots. Trigger is planning intent — "禅宗对比" goes to /compare-masters; "禅宗从哪开始学" goes here.
The skill promises to build a learning sequence within a Buddhist tradition—from foundation to advanced levels, accounting for blind spots. Triggers on queries like "where to start with Zen" or "what's next to read". Differs from school comparisons by offering sequence instead of parallel views.
The files contain logic for splitting by tradition and level (L0–L3), but concrete paths are missing from the description—only scaffolding shows. No model runs. Broken references to other skills detected. Code quality rated 80, process 35—a sign the frame exists but content doesn't. In practice, you'll get either generic guidance or bouncing between skills.
Install if you're ready to fill in the routes yourself, or if it performs better than advertised.
Differs from /compare-masters (parallel opinion) and /master-debate (adversarial dialectic) by being 纵向 / 时序: stage-by-stage plan keyed on tradition × level…
As a process D 35/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: scripts/validate-curriculum-sources.py
The same skill appears in 1 more place: Master-skill
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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: 10. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: scripts/validate-curriculum-sources.py - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "kind" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "verified_by" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "verified_at"
Process rating: all ten parameters 35/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/validate-curriculum-sources.py
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 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
- 100Steps. 21 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1132 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- low The response is described with custom markup (4 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 430: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 21 items
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (8 of 8)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 80.