Date: 2026-07-11 Run: final treatment with the skill after one rewrite-option iteration. | # | Assertion | Result | Evidence | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1 | Report an exact R2 finding | PASS | The finding quotes the hedged statement and explains the ambiguous strength. | | 2 | Present promoted and demoted rewrites | PASS | Mandatory and nonbinding-context alternatives are both present. | | 3 | Mark the choice as an author decision | PASS | The rewrite explicitly names an author decision. | ...
Scanned 9/3/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add briandconnelly/codex-in-claude --skill runs --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Runs?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/briandconnelly-runs-e59d42e1)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
# Scenario 3 — With-Skill Scoring
Date: 2026-07-11
Run: final treatment with the skill after one rewrite-option iteration.
| # | Assertion | Result | Evidence |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Report an exact R2 finding | PASS | The finding quotes the hedged statement and explains the ambiguous strength. |
| 2 | Present promoted and demoted rewrites | PASS | Mandatory and nonbinding-context alternatives are both present. |
| 3 | Mark the choice as an author decision | PASS | The rewrite explicitly names an author decision. |
| 4 | Do not silently select an interpretation | PASS | Three labeled alternatives are presented without selection. |
| 5 | Leave the other two rules unflagged | PASS | The summary calls both other rules explicit, atomic, and verifiable. |
Total: 5/5.
## Iteration Note
The first treatment substituted a binding default for the required demoted nonbinding alternative.
The rewrite contract was tightened so a defeasible default cannot replace the promoted-versus-demoted pair.
## Scored Output
## Findings
**R2 Explicit strength**
Location: line 11.
Quoted text: “Generally prefer rebase over merge.”
Why it fails: “Generally” leaves unclear whether this is a binding default, an absolute requirement, or nonbinding guidance, and no override conditions are identified.
Severity: material.
Suggested rewrite: this is an author decision among the following meanings.
- Mandatory: “Use rebase instead of merge.”
- Binding default: “Prefer rebase over merge unless [specify the conditions that permit merging].”
- Nonbinding context: move the statement outside `## Rules` and write, “Rebase is commonly used instead of merge, but this document does not require it.”
## Summary
Counts per rule: R1 0, R2 1, R3 0, R4 0, R5 0.
Counts per severity: material 1, minor 0.
The document cleanly isolates its behavioral rules in a dedicated section, and the force-push and fixup-commit rules are explicit, atomic, and verifiable.
The sole defect is the ambiguous strength of the rebase preference, which requires the author to decide whether it is mandatory, a binding default with stated exceptions, or merely contextual guidance.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!