critique-toy

Solid

Reviews short markdown field-operations notices, memos, and similar prose documents against the toy TOY-* grammar, covering a passive-voice recast that deletes the actor, a hedging phrase stacked ahead of an otherwise direct statement, and a subheading left with no body before the next heading of equal or higher level. Use when the user asks for a review, feedback, a second opinion, a red-line pass, or a quality check on one of this fixture's worked-example documents. This is the skill template's own committed fixture, not a shipped critique-family skill, and it is never registered in library.json.

Data & Documents 1 stars 0 forks Updated 4 days ago Apache-2.0

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 80/100

Stars 20%
10
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# critique-toy Reviews a markdown-prose artifact composed in the toy domain's own grammar (`bench/generator/README.md`, "Worked example: the toy domain") against its three TOY-* criteria: a passive-voice recast that deletes the actor (TOY-ACTIVE), a hedging phrase stacked ahead of an otherwise direct statement (TOY-HEDGE), and a subheading left with no body before the next heading of equal or higher level (TOY-ORPHAN). This skill is `docs/internal/skill-template.md`'s own committed fixture: it exists to prove the template builds end to end (S-04 spec, Behavior/Examples), not as a seventh launch skill. It lives under `skills/_template-fixture/` rather than directly under `skills/` precisely so it is never discovered as a shipped component, and it is never registered in `library.json`. ## Contract Every finding this skill emits conforms to `contract/critique-contract.schema.json`. See `docs/reference/critique-contract.md` for the field contracts a schema cannot check on its own: location navigable unaided, evidence quoted or measured rather than characterized, violation naming the breach, fix actionable and specific. ## Protocol Follow these four passes in order. Do not skip ahead to severity or fixes while still sweeping. 1. **Inventory.** Map the artifact's structure (sections, headings, components, whatever the artifact type has). No judgments yet, no findings yet. This pass exists so the sweep in step 2 does not anchor on whatever was noticed first. 2. **Criteri...

Details

Author
product-on-purpose
Repository
product-on-purpose/critique-skills
Created
3 weeks ago
Last Updated
4 days ago
Language
Python
License
Apache-2.0

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Solid

critique-clarity

Reviews markdown or plain-text prose for clarity against the Federal Plain Language Guidelines and Williams' Style: readability, passive voice, sentence length, and nominalization density. Judges sentence- and passage-level readability, not whether an argument's claim is supported or its structure holds together (critique-argument covers that). Use when the user asks for feedback, a second opinion, a red-line pass, or a quality check on a memo, PRD, proposal, or any prose document before it goes out.

1 Updated 4 days ago
product-on-purpose
AI & Automation Solid

critique-docs

Reviews technical documentation pages and page trees written in markdown against the Diataxis framework: tutorial, how-to, reference, and explanation mode fit, plus heading structure, orphaned pages, cross-mode linking, and navigation-list length. Use when the user asks for a review, feedback, a second opinion, a red-line pass, or a quality check on a docs site, a README tree, a knowledge base, or any markdown documentation before it ships.

1 Updated 4 days ago
product-on-purpose
AI & Automation Solid

critique-argument

Reviews argumentative prose - essays, proposals, position papers, recommendation memos, strategy docs, and op-eds - against the Toulmin model of argument: whether the claim, grounds, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal are present, explicit, and actually hold together. Judges the argument's structure, not prose readability or sentence mechanics (critique-clarity covers that). Use when the user asks for a review, feedback, a second opinion, a red-line pass, a quality check, or a critique of whether an argument holds up before it goes out.

1 Updated 4 days ago
product-on-purpose