Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

project-review

Use when evaluating a completed or in-progress project across scope, correctness, quality, testing, and learning outcomes using structured Praise-Critique-Grow feedback.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Files included (3)

  • SKILL.md3.5 KB
  • examples.md2.2 KB
  • README.md766 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Purpose

Provide structured, constructive review of a learner's project at a milestone or completion checkpoint. Combines technical evaluation with learning-outcome assessment. Uses Praise-Critique-Grow to maintain learner motivation while surfacing real issues.

Activation

  • Milestone reached in build-with-me. Feature or project completed. Learner asks for feedback on their work. Pre-submission review (assignment, portfolio, interview take-home).
  • Skip if: project hasn't started. Learner needs concept help → teach-concept. Active debugging in progress → debug-teacher.
  • Routing: issues found → use challenge-generator for targeted practice. Concept gaps → teach-concept. Design issues → architecture-review. Log weak areas to weak-area-tracker.

Inputs

  • Project/feature code and documentation, original requirements/scope, learner's stated goals, relevant assessment criteria.

Review Dimensions

  • Scope: does it meet stated requirements? Scope creep? Missing features?
  • Correctness: does it produce correct results? Edge cases handled?
  • Code Quality: readability, naming, structure, DRY, separation of concerns.
  • Testing: test coverage, test quality, edge case testing.
  • Learning Outcomes: what did the learner demonstrate they understand? What gaps remain?

Workflow

  1. Self-Assessment — Ask learner first: "What do you think went well? What would you change?" This surfaces their self-awareness before external feedback.
  2. Review — Evaluate across all 5 dimensions. Note strengths and issues with specific code/design references.
  3. Praise — Start with 2–3 specific strengths. Reference actual decisions/code, not generic compliments.
  4. Critique — List issues priority-ordered. Each: dimension, description, severity, specific code reference. Max 5 issues per review — more overwhelms.
  5. Grow — For each major issue: one concrete next action. Frame as growth opportunity, not failure. Include a learning recommendation (skill or concept to revisit).
  6. Retrospective — Ask one synthesis question: "What's the most important thing you learned from building this?" Record answer for learning-memory.

Rules

  • DO: require self-assessment before giving feedback.
  • DO: praise specific decisions, not generic effort.
  • DO: limit critique to top 5 issues — prioritize by impact.
  • DO: frame growth actions as opportunities, not failures.
  • DO: end with a retrospective question and record the answer.
  • DON'T: start with criticism — always Praise first.
  • DON'T: give vague feedback ("good job" / "needs work").
  • DON'T: rewrite the learner's code — point to issues and let them fix.
  • DON'T: skip the self-assessment — it builds metacognitive skill.

Output

Responses should contain: self-assessment prompt, praise (2–3 specific strengths), critique (issues with dimension + severity + code reference), grow (next actions + learning recommendations), and retrospective question. Format naturally.

Checklist

  • Self-assessment requested before external feedback.
  • Praise references specific code/decisions.
  • Critique limited to top 5 issues, priority-ordered.
  • Retrospective question asked and answer recorded.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Use when critiquing a system design across correctness, scalability, reliability, maintainability, and observability using probe-first questioning.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when guiding a learner through real project implementation while preserving their ownership and teaching through the build process.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when generating personalized practice challenges calibrated to the learner's weak areas, level, and project context.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when verifying whether the learner truly understands a concept through reasoning and application, not recall trivia.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when coaching hypothesis-driven debugging that requires the learner to gather evidence and reason about root causes before applying fixes.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when a learner has surface understanding and needs to explore mechanism, tradeoffs, edge cases, and production implications at depth.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

See all skills by yugash007

Report a problem with this skill