Percerno Skillsbeta
← everything it can do · pdf

Lesson Learned TEXT

Analyzes recent git commits or diffs to identify and articulate specific software engineering principles demonstrated by the code changes. It produces a reflective summary that maps observed patterns to established SE concepts, providing actionable takeaways for future development.

5 uses this weeksource softaworkslicence MIT
Quality gate: INCONCLUSIVE · better answers · measured 2026-10-23
Blind-judged against the bare model on 2 requests: average lift -2.0 points (specificity, structure, method, fit).
won 1/2, lift -2.0, tokens ×177.95
Security scan: clean · 2026-10-24 · 4 files · ran in sandbox
no network calls, shell tricks, credential access or instruction tampering found in its files.

Try asking

Say it in your own words; the assistant finds this recipe by itself. Examples:

“Jeg har lige refaktoreret min database-lag. Kan du se på de sidste commits og fortælle mig, hvilket softwareingeniør-princip jeg har anvendt?”
“Hvad er den vigtigste læring her? Jeg vil gerne forstå, hvilken kompromis jeg gik ind på mellem ydeevne og læsbarhed i min kode.”
“Reflekter over ændringerne i `src/api/handlers.py`. Har jeg overholdt single responsibility principle, eller burde jeg have adskilt logikken mere?”
“I just finished refactoring the authentication module. Can you look at the last 5 commits and tell me what engineering principle I demonstrated?”
“What is the main lesson here? I want to understand the trade-off I made between readability and performance in the database layer.”
“Reflect on the changes in `src/api/handlers.py`. Did I follow the single responsibility principle, or did I miss an opportunity to decouple the logic?”
Try this skill from Claude, ChatGPT or a chat on your own page. Free plan, no credit card.Get started free

Good for

git-analysiscode-reviewsoftware-engineeringreflectionprinciplesdiff-analysislearningbest-practices

Not for

Do not use this skill for standard code reviews focused on finding bugs, security vulnerabilities, or style violations; use a 'code-review' or 'security-audit' skill instead. It is not suitable for analyzing entire repositories or historical trends without a specific recent change set; use 'codebase-analysis' for that. Avoid using it for trivial changes like typo fixes where no deep engineering lesson exists.

Details

When it is the right choice

Use this skill when the user wants to reflect on recent code changes to extract engineering insights or lessons. It is appropriate when the user asks questions like 'what can I learn from this?', 'what is the engineering takeaway here?', or 'reflect on my recent commits.' It is ideal for post-commit or pre-merge reviews where the goal is educational rather than bug-finding.

The full recipe the assistant reads

Lesson Learned

Extract specific, grounded software engineering lessons from actual code changes. Not a lecture -- a mirror. Show the user what their code already demonstrates.

Before You Begin

Load the principles reference first.

  1. Read references/se-principles.md to have the principle catalog available
  2. Optionally read references/anti-patterns.md if you suspect the changes include areas for improvement
  3. Determine the scope of analysis (see Phase 1)

Do not proceed until you've loaded at least se-principles.md.

Phase 1: Determine Scope

Ask the user or infer from context what to analyze.

Scope Git Commands When to Use
Feature branch git log main..HEAD --oneline + git diff main...HEAD User is on a non-main branch (default)
Last N commits git log --oneline -N + git diff HEAD~N..HEAD User specifies a range, or on main (default N=5)
Specific commit git show <sha> User references a specific commit
Working changes git diff + git diff --cached User says "what about these changes?" before committing

Default behavior: - If on a feature branch: analyze branch commits vs main - If on main: analyze the last 5 commits - If the user provides a different scope, use that

Phase 2: Gather Changes

  1. Run git log with the determined scope to get the commit list and messages
  2. Run git diff for the full diff of the scope
  3. If the diff is large (>500 lines), use git diff --stat first, then selectively read the top 3-5 most-changed files
  4. Read commit messages carefully -- they contain intent that raw diffs miss
  5. Only read changed files. Do not read the entire repo.

Phase 3: Analyze

Identify the dominant pattern -- the single most instructive thing about these changes.

Look for: - Structural decisions -- How was the code organized? Why those boundaries? - Trade-offs made -- What was gained vs. sacrificed? (readability vs. performance, DRY vs. clarity, speed vs. correctness) - Problems solved -- What was the before/after? What made the "after" better? - Missed opportunities -- Where could the code improve? (present gently as "next time, consider...")

Map findings to specific principles from references/se-principles.md. Be specific -- quote actual code, reference actual file names and line changes.

Phase 4: Present the Lesson

Use this template:

## Lesson: [Principle Name]

**What happened in the code:**
[2-3 sentences describing the specific change, referencing files and commits]

**The principle at work:**
[1-2 sentences explaining the SE principle]

**Why it matters:**
[1-2 sentences on the practical consequence -- what would go wrong without this, or what goes right because of it]

**Takeaway for next time:**
[One concrete, actionable sentence the user can apply to future work]

If there is a second lesson worth noting (maximum 2 additional):

---

### Also worth noting: [Principle Name]

**In the code:** [1 sentence]
**The principle:** [1 sentence]
**Takeaway:** [1 sentence]

What NOT to Do

Avoid Why Instead
Listing every principle that vaguely applies Overwhelming and generic Pick the 1-2 most relevant
Analyzing files that were not changed Scope creep Stick to the diff
Ignoring commit messages They contain intent that diffs miss Read them as primary context
Abstract advice disconnected from the code Not actionable Always reference specific files/lines
Negative-only feedback Demoralizing Lead with what works, then suggest improvements
More than 3 lessons Dilutes the insight One well-grounded lesson beats seven vague ones

Conversation Style

  • Reflective, not prescriptive. Use the user's own code as primary evidence.
  • Never say "you should have..." -- instead use "the approach here shows..." or "next time you face this, consider..."
  • If the code is good, say so. Not every lesson is about what went wrong. Recognizing good patterns reinforces them.
  • If the changes are trivial (a single config tweak, a typo fix), say so honestly rather than forcing a lesson. "These changes are straightforward -- no deep lesson here, just good housekeeping."
  • Be specific. Generic advice is worthless. Every claim must point to a concrete code change.
Files in this skill (5)
  • LICENSE
  • README.md
  • SKILL.md
  • references/anti-patterns.md
  • references/se-principles.md
Where it comes from

Vendored from softaworks/agent-toolkit, commit 3027f20f3181, path skills/lesson-learned, licence MIT. The upstream licence file ships inside the skill.