run-learning-retrospective

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

Quality

64%

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

78%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.

The content is concise and well-structured with a clear sequenced workflow for a simple instructional skill. Its main weakness is actionability: the steps describe what to do but not how to execute or judge each step concretely.

Suggestions

Add concrete execution detail per step, e.g. how to detect a 'recurring' blocker (frequency threshold) and how to rank concepts for reinforcement.

Specify what 'measurable checkpoint' means (e.g. a dated target with a pass/fail criterion) so step 5 is actionable.

Optionally note what to ask via the Ask user tool at each step so the interaction is reproducible.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section (Trigger, Workflow, Tools, Output) earns its place and assumes Claude's competence.	5 / 5
Actionability	The numbered steps give clear direction ('Review completed work against target outcomes', 'Identify recurring blockers and weak concepts') but stay high-level, missing the specific methods or criteria that would make the guidance fully executable.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear five-step sequence is present and well ordered; no explicit validation checkpoints, but for a conversational retrospective they are not strictly required, so it sits just below the feedback-loop anchor.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	This is a short single-purpose skill (under 50 lines) with no need for external references, and its sections are well-organized, so per the scoring note it scores 5 on progressive disclosure.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

50%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.

The description states a clear purpose with three actions but is missing an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, capping completeness, and its keywords lack synonym coverage. It is functional but generic for discovery.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause naming concrete triggers, e.g. 'Use when a learner finishes a milestone and wants to review progress, find blockers, or revise their study plan.'

Broaden trigger terms with natural synonyms learners say ('study plan', 'stuck', 'review my progress', 'what to reinforce').

Tighten actions to more concrete operations (e.g. 'compare completed work to target outcomes, rank weak concepts, reprioritize practice tasks').

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the learning domain and three actions ('Evaluate learning progress, identify blockers, and adjust the learning plan'), but the verbs are high-level and generic rather than concrete operations, matching the anchor that lists 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage.	3 / 5
Completeness	The description gives a clear 'what' (evaluate progress, identify blockers, adjust plan) but no 'when' trigger clause is present, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains relevant natural keywords ('learning progress', 'blockers', 'learning plan') a learner might say, but lacks common variations or synonyms (e.g. 'study', 'review', 'stuck') and has no 'Use when...' trigger phrase.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The learning-retrospective niche is somewhat specific but the phrasing could overlap with general planning or review skills; it does not yet have distinct trigger phrases that minimize conflict risk.	3 / 5
	Total	12 / 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: 51a96e0

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.