Check for understanding
Use this skill automatically before carrying out a request that depends materially on the user
understanding content or consequences. Typical triggers include analysing review comments,
reviewing or changing a PR, drafting or posting GitHub comments, approving a plan, making a
product-policy decision, or carrying out a consequential repository change. Do not add this gate
to trivial mechanical requests whose meaning and effect are already unambiguous.
The gate is on by default. If the user explicitly asks to skip the check-for-understanding
process, honour that request for the current action and proceed under the user's existing scope and
permissions. Do not infer a skip from urgency, confidence, a previous successful check, or a vague
request to "just do it".
Before asking
- Identify the exact action the user wants completed and the minimum context needed to understand
it.
- Perform only safe, read-only investigation needed to build accurate questions. Do not edit
files, post comments, change issues or PRs, commit, push, merge, or perform other consequential
actions before the gate passes.
- Separate facts, decisions, open questions, and proposed actions. Questions must test the
material facts and decisions that control the requested action, not incidental trivia.
Question set
Ask at least three multiple-choice questions in one turn. Scale the set with the material being
understood:
- 3 questions for a small, single-decision task;
- 4–5 for a moderate review, comment, or change;
- 6 or more when the task spans multiple files, interacting policies, risks, or external actions.
Use medium-difficulty questions with one defensible answer. Test understanding of the objective,
scope/ownership, relevant evidence, expected behaviour, and important consequences or validation
limits. Use plausible distractors, but do not use trick wording, obscure details, or answers that
depend on guessing the agent's preference. Accept equivalent explanations when grading.
Do not reveal the answers before the user responds. Keep the questions focused on the content that
must be understood to perform the requested action.
Gate
- If every answer demonstrates understanding, state that the check passed and carry out the exact
requested action. Preserve the original scope; passing the check does not grant extra authority.
- If any answer is wrong, incomplete, or materially ambiguous, do not finish the requested action.
Identify the misunderstood concept briefly, correct the relevant fact when useful, and ask a new
focused set of at least three questions. Do not merely repeat the same questions or turn the
process into a gotcha quiz.
- Continue until the user demonstrates understanding or explicitly asks to skip the process.
- If the task or its material context changes, discard the old result and run a fresh check for the
changed action.
- A refusal to answer is not a passing result. Ask whether the user wants to answer the questions or
explicitly skip the gate.
Completion
After a passing check or explicit skip, perform the requested work and report any validation limits
or unresolved decisions honestly. If the requested action becomes unsafe, out of scope, or requires
new authority, stop and ask for that separately; this skill never overrides repository, tool, or
user-permission boundaries.
1---2name: check-for-understanding3description: Verify the user's understanding before carrying out a request whose correctness depends on understanding its context, consequences, or evidence.4---56# Check for understanding78Use this skill automatically before carrying out a request that depends materially on the user9understanding content or consequences. Typical triggers include analysing review comments,10reviewing or changing a PR, drafting or posting GitHub comments, approving a plan, making a11product-policy decision, or carrying out a consequential repository change. Do not add this gate12to trivial mechanical requests whose meaning and effect are already unambiguous.1314The gate is on by default. If the user explicitly asks to skip the check-for-understanding15process, honour that request for the current action and proceed under the user's existing scope and16permissions. Do not infer a skip from urgency, confidence, a previous successful check, or a vague17request to "just do it".1819## Before asking20211. Identify the exact action the user wants completed and the minimum context needed to understand22 it.232. Perform only safe, read-only investigation needed to build accurate questions. Do not edit24 files, post comments, change issues or PRs, commit, push, merge, or perform other consequential25 actions before the gate passes.263. Separate facts, decisions, open questions, and proposed actions. Questions must test the27 material facts and decisions that control the requested action, not incidental trivia.2829## Question set3031Ask at least three multiple-choice questions in one turn. Scale the set with the material being32understood:3334- 3 questions for a small, single-decision task;35- 4–5 for a moderate review, comment, or change;36- 6 or more when the task spans multiple files, interacting policies, risks, or external actions.3738Use medium-difficulty questions with one defensible answer. Test understanding of the objective,39scope/ownership, relevant evidence, expected behaviour, and important consequences or validation40limits. Use plausible distractors, but do not use trick wording, obscure details, or answers that41depend on guessing the agent's preference. Accept equivalent explanations when grading.4243Do not reveal the answers before the user responds. Keep the questions focused on the content that44must be understood to perform the requested action.4546## Gate4748- If every answer demonstrates understanding, state that the check passed and carry out the exact49 requested action. Preserve the original scope; passing the check does not grant extra authority.50- If any answer is wrong, incomplete, or materially ambiguous, do not finish the requested action.51 Identify the misunderstood concept briefly, correct the relevant fact when useful, and ask a new52 focused set of at least three questions. Do not merely repeat the same questions or turn the53 process into a gotcha quiz.54- Continue until the user demonstrates understanding or explicitly asks to skip the process.55- If the task or its material context changes, discard the old result and run a fresh check for the56 changed action.57- A refusal to answer is not a passing result. Ask whether the user wants to answer the questions or58 explicitly skip the gate.5960## Completion6162After a passing check or explicit skip, perform the requested work and report any validation limits63or unresolved decisions honestly. If the requested action becomes unsafe, out of scope, or requires64new authority, stop and ask for that separately; this skill never overrides repository, tool, or65user-permission boundaries.