run-learning-retrospective

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

Quality

31%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./teaching/skills/run-learning-retrospective/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

32%

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 provides a reasonable but vague overview of learning evaluation capabilities. Its main weaknesses are the absence of explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...') and lack of concrete, specific actions. It would benefit from more natural user-facing keywords and a clear statement of when this skill should be selected.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to review their learning progress, check understanding, identify what's blocking them, or wants to revise their study plan.'

Include more natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'study plan', 'stuck', 'not making progress', 'review what I've learned', 'adjust curriculum', or 'check-in'.

Make the actions more concrete, e.g., 'Assesses quiz results and comprehension gaps, identifies specific topics causing difficulty, and restructures the learning plan with revised milestones.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names a domain (learning) and lists some actions (evaluate progress, identify blockers, adjust plan), but the actions are somewhat generic and lack concrete details about how these are performed or what outputs are produced.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what the skill does but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and since the 'what' is also somewhat vague, this scores a 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes some relevant terms like 'learning progress', 'blockers', and 'learning plan', but misses common user variations such as 'study plan', 'stuck', 'not understanding', 'review progress', 'check-in', or 'update curriculum'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The combination of 'learning progress', 'blockers', and 'learning plan' provides some specificity to a learning/education domain, but could easily overlap with general tutoring, mentoring, or project management skills that also deal with progress tracking and blockers.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Implementation

29%

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

This skill is essentially a high-level outline that describes what Claude would naturally do when asked to run a learning retrospective. It lacks concrete examples, templates, evaluation criteria, or specific techniques that would make it actionable. The workflow steps read more like a table of contents than executable instructions.

Suggestions

Add a concrete example of a progress retrospective output, including specific metrics or rubric criteria for evaluating learning progress (e.g., a template with sections for 'concepts mastered,' 'concepts struggling,' 'time spent vs. planned').

Include specific questions or prompts to ask the learner via the Ask user tool, rather than leaving the interaction entirely unstructured.

Add decision criteria or heuristics for key workflow steps — e.g., how to determine whether to reinforce vs. defer a concept, or how to adjust pacing based on observed performance.

Include a validation step such as confirming the updated plan with the learner before finalizing, to create a feedback loop.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is relatively brief and doesn't over-explain concepts Claude already knows, but the workflow steps are generic and vague enough that they don't add much value — they describe what Claude would naturally do without specific, novel guidance.	2 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides only abstract, high-level directions ('identify recurring blockers,' 'adjust pacing') with no concrete examples, templates, rubrics, question frameworks, or specific criteria for evaluation. There is nothing executable or copy-paste ready.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The five steps are vaguely sequenced but lack any validation checkpoints, decision criteria, or feedback loops. There's no guidance on how to determine if blockers are correctly identified, how to measure progress, or what constitutes a valid adjustment.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	For a simple, short skill with no bundle files, the content is organized into clear sections (Trigger, Workflow, Tools, Output) and doesn't need external references. The structure is appropriate for its scope.	3 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: cursor/plugins
Commit: b8f2564

Reviewed: 3 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.