run-learning-retrospective

Evaluate learning progress, identify blockers, and adjust the learning plan

Quality

60%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./teaching/skills/run-learning-retrospective/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-organized, token-efficient body for a simple skill, but the workflow stays at the level of abstract direction: no concrete methods for identifying blockers, no output structure, and no checkpoint to validate findings with the learner.

Suggestions

Add concrete guidance for each step, e.g., specific questions to ask the learner when identifying blockers, or a template for the progress retrospective.

Define the structure of the outputs (e.g., what fields the updated learning plan and next milestone definition should contain).

Insert a validation checkpoint, such as confirming identified blockers with the learner before adjusting pacing and practice tasks.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and efficient — 29 lines with no padded explanations of concepts Claude already knows; sections (Trigger, Workflow, Tools, Output) each earn their tokens. Matches the 'Lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	Steps like 'Review completed work against target outcomes' and 'Identify recurring blockers and weak concepts' are high-level directions with no concrete methods, question templates, output formats, or examples. Matches 'Minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints but missing the specific steps to execute'.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 5-step sequence is present, but there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops — nothing verifies findings with the learner before adjusting the plan. Matches 'Steps listed but validation gaps; sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit'.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, needs no external references (none exist in the bundle), and is organized into clear sections. Per the rubric guideline, this satisfies the top anchor for simple skills.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

55%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A concise, adequately specific description with a clear 'what' but a missing 'when'. The absence of any 'Use when...' trigger clause and of natural trigger synonyms (e.g., 'retrospective') limits discoverability and completeness.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' trigger clause, e.g., 'Use when a learner completes a milestone and needs a retrospective on their progress.'

Include natural trigger synonyms such as 'retrospective', 'review learning progress', or 'adjust study plan' to improve keyword coverage.

Make actions slightly more concrete (e.g., mention producing an updated learning plan and next milestone) to increase distinctiveness from generic planning skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists three concrete actions — 'Evaluate learning progress', 'identify blockers', 'adjust the learning plan' — similar to the score-4 anchor of several specific actions with minor gaps. It is not 5 because coverage is incomplete (no mention of retrospective outputs, milestone setting, or pacing) and not 3 because it goes beyond 1-2 actions.	4 / 5
Completeness	The description gives a clear 'what' (evaluate, identify, adjust) but contains no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'learning progress', 'blockers', and 'learning plan' are relevant keywords, but natural variations users would say ('retrospective', 'review my progress', 'study check-in') are missing. Matches the anchor 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The learning domain gives it a somewhat specific niche ('learning progress', 'learning plan'), but it could still overlap with general tutoring, planning, or progress-review skills. Not 4 because no trigger phrases distinguish it from closely related skills.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: cursor/plugins
Path: teaching/skills/run-learning-retrospective/SKILL.md
Commit: c47b128

Reviewed: 2 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.