system-checking
Skill0 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Audits and upgrades the learning system itself. Evaluates coaching effectiveness, curriculum alignment with market, skill quality, architecture health, and architecture currency. Triggers on /system-check, during Friday reflections, or when the system suspects underperformance. Every check produces at least one concrete improvement. This is how the system evolves.
In this repository21 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adr-captureSkill
- adversarial-reviewSkill
- architect-firstSkill
- blog-draftingSkill
- brainstorming-knowledge-builderSkill
- code-reviewingSkill
- session-startSkill
- debug-systemsSkill
- evolution-logSkill
- faang-loop-simulationSkill
- learn-in-publicSkill
- mock-assessingSkill
- os-lensSkill
- partner-systemSkill
- progress-updatingSkill
- review-systemsSkill
- spaced-reviewingSkill
- systems-traceSkill
- trend-scoutingSkill
- weekly-reflectingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈8
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 15
When coaching feels off or exercises feel too easy/hard
- Very specific: line 34
Run /trends for latest industry data
- Very specific: line 36
Should any content be added/removed/reordered?
- Distinctive: line 61
Accuracy check: Read each memory file and verify against current project state.
- Very specific: line 62
SessionStart hook test: Run .claude/scripts/session-memory.sh and verify it outputs valid JSON with all critical context.
- Distinctive: line 67
Action: If any memory is stale, update or remove it.
- Distinctive: line 76
Feature adoption: Search changelog for new features replacing existing workarounds.
- Distinctive: line 85
Skill ecosystem: Search awesome-claude-skills repos (hesreallyhim/awesome-claude-code, rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit, …
- Very specific: line 86
Student evidence audit: Run python scripts/aggregate_evidence.py --all.
- Distinctive: line 87
Career path alignment: Check market salaries and role titles.
- Distinctive: line 89
Self-healing: If any part of this project is broken, unused, or outdated — fix it during this check.
- Distinctive: line 118
Every check produces at least one concrete improvement.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
System Check -- Self-Evolution Audit
The most important skill. This is how the entire learning system gets smarter.
Trigger
/system-check- During Friday reflections
- When coaching feels off or exercises feel too easy/hard
Execution
- Read current state:
- CLAUDE.md (coaching rules being followed?)
- ROADMAP.md (pace right? too slow? too fast?)
- PROGRESS.md last 7 entries (trajectory)
- Memory files (patterns observed)
Evaluate five dimensions:
a. Coaching effectiveness:
- Which questions revealed real depth this week?
- Which coaching techniques produced breakthroughs?
- What fell flat? What should change?
- Is the student's understanding deepening or plateauing? Evidence?
b. Curriculum vs. market:
- Run
/trendsfor latest industry data - Does current topic match what companies hire for?
- Should any content be added/removed/reordered?
- Is the pace producing mastery or just exposure?
c. Skill quality audit:
- Which skills were used this week? Which weren't?
- Are skill outputs actually helpful or just noise?
- Any skills need updating based on new patterns learned?
- Any new skills needed that don't exist yet?
d. Knowledge retention (cross-reference /review-deck):
- What's the spaced review hit rate?
- Which categories have struggling cards?
- Is knowledge compounding or leaking?
e. System architecture:
- CLAUDE.md under 60 lines? (official best practice)
.claude/rules/still needed or redundant with native Claude behavior?- Memory growing usefully or accumulating noise?
- New Claude Code capabilities to adopt? (check release notes)
- Community skills/plugins worth integrating?
f. Memory Health Audit (CRITICAL): Memory is the foundation of the coaching relationship. Without it, Claude cannot help the student.
- Completeness check: Does memory contain the student's full profile, all feedback, all planning decisions?
- Accuracy check: Read each memory file and verify against current project state. Stale memories = outdated advice.
- SessionStart hook test: Run
.claude/scripts/session-memory.shand verify it outputs valid JSON with all critical context. - Coverage check: Were there decisions or corrections in recent sessions that should have been saved but weren't?
- MEMORY.md index check: Is the index up to date? Are all memory files listed? Are any orphaned?
- Size check: MEMORY.md must stay under 200 lines. Individual memory files should be concise, not bloated.
- Injection check: Is the SessionStart hook injecting: user profile, key feedback, topic status, recent progress, git state, session rules?
- Action: If any memory is stale, update or remove it. If any decision is missing, save it now.
g. Architecture Currency Audit (CRITICAL): Practices that are best-practice today become bottlenecks as models improve. Ask: "If I set up this project from scratch today with the latest Claude Code, what would I do differently?"
- CLAUDE.md weight check: Is each rule adding value or noise? If Claude follows it without being told, remove it.
- Rules relevance: Are
.claude/rules/files still needed? Grep Claude Code changelog for capability improvements that obsolete rules. - Hooks necessity: Are hooks enforcing things Claude now does automatically? Remove friction that's no longer needed.
- Skill architecture: Are skills using the latest frontmatter fields? New Claude Code versions add capabilities -- adopt them.
- Feature adoption: Search changelog for new features replacing existing workarounds. If Claude adds native support for something we built manually, our manual version becomes debt.
- Subagent model check: Are agents using optimal models? Update as faster/better models release.
- Memory hook check: Is
session-memory.shstill the best approach? Check for new Claude Code memory features that could replace it.
h. Industry Technique Adoption (CRITICAL): The system must stay current with how expert AI practitioners work, not just what they build.
- Search: "Claude Code new features 2026", "Claude Code best practices", "Claude Code skills trending" -- what's changed since last check?
- Practitioner patterns: Are there new workflows (Shrivu, Osmani, Karpathy, or others) that should inform how sessions work?
- Skill ecosystem: Search awesome-claude-skills repos (hesreallyhim/awesome-claude-code, rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit, travisvn/awesome-claude-skills). Any community skills worth adopting or learning from?
- Student evidence audit: Run
python scripts/aggregate_evidence.py --all. Are there exercises where 3+ students recorded evidence? If yes, update EXERCISE-EVIDENCE.md hints with REAL data (replace projections with actuals). - Career path alignment: Check market salaries and role titles. Update ROADMAP career path callouts if numbers shifted.
- TDD evolution: Is Red-Green-Refactor still the industry standard, or has a better testing pattern emerged?
- Self-healing: If any part of this project is broken, unused, or outdated — fix it during this check. Don't report it. Fix it.
- Contracts check: Are all contracts (TDD, standards, session flow) being followed? If not, why? Adjust the contract or enforce it.
- Output report:
SYSTEM CHECK -- {date} Health: [GREEN/YELLOW/RED] Working well: - [specific observation with evidence] Needs adjustment: - [specific recommendation with action item] Curriculum alignment: [current vs market] System upgrades to implement: - [specific change to make NOW] Evolution metric: [how is the system different from last check?] - Implement at least one upgrade -- update CLAUDE.md, skills, memory, or architecture.
- Persist insights to memory.
Rules
- Be honest about failures. "This skill isn't helping" is valid.
- Every check produces at least one concrete improvement. No check is just a report.
- The system should be measurably better after every system-check.
- Compare the student's trajectory to market requirements, not just internal progress.
- This skill can modify any file in the project -- it's the system's self-improvement mechanism.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

