Hacktoberfest 2026: le issue che i maintainer hanno segnato per ottobre, aperte e adatte ai principianti. Sfoglia le issue Hacktoberfest

[curriculum-eval] side-quest-11-06-anthropic-key.md: active_learning — mostly passive procedural steps, low activity density

Chiusa Adatta ai principianti
  • Qualcosa non va?
#3,812 0 commenti 0 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Valutazione

Difficoltà
1/5
Tempo stimato
1-3 ore
Idoneità per principianti
92/100
Tipo di issue
Documentazione
Chiarezza
Specificata chiaramente
Stato di attività
Attiva
Stack tecnologico
markdown
Ambito
documentation

Direzione di ricerca

Apri workshop/side-quest-11-06-anthropic-key.md e ispeziona il blocco di dettagli esistente Common mistakes e la sezione Compile your workflow. Rimuovi solo il grassetto in eccesso specificato, aggiungi la micro-attività di verifica preservando il contenuto esistente, quindi esegui npx --yes markdownlint-cli2 "workshop/side-quest-11-06-anthropic-key.md" e correggi eventuali errori di lint introdotti.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

curriculum documentation quality

File: workshop/side-quest-11-06-anthropic-key.md
Overall Score: 5.39 / 10.0 (corpus mean: 6.09 / 10.0)

Flagged Dimensions:

Dimension Score Benchmark Delta
cognitive_load 7.2 10.0 (≤ 15 new concepts) -2.8 (26 new concepts, 11 over ideal)
active_learning 3.5 10.0 (density ≥ 3) -6.5

Root Cause (≤ 2 sentences):
This short 665-word setup guide introduces 26 distinct bolded/code-formatted terms (ANTHROPIC_API_KEY, engine: claude, api.anthropic.com, network.allowed, copilot-requests: write, multiple UI-path terms, common-mistakes list items, etc.) — nearly double the 15-concept ideal for its length — packed into procedural steps, secret-naming rules, and a common-mistakes list, each of which reads as a new concept to the rubric's bold/code scan. Activity density (1.05) is well below 3.0 because the page is mostly sequential prose instructions with only one real code block plus 5 checklist items.

Evidence (quoted from the file):

"Wrong name: any variation (anthropic_api_key, ANTHROPIC-API-KEY, CLAUDE_API_KEY) will cause a silent auth failure." ... "Copied with extra whitespace: pasting from some tools adds a leading space." ... "Closed the Anthropic tab before saving: you cannot retrieve the key again." — three bolded pitfall labels plus four inline-code secret-name variants in one bullet list.

Learning Science Rationale:
Cognitive Load Theory suggests that a procedural how-to page should minimize extraneous load from listing every possible failure mode inline; segmenting common mistakes into a clearly-labeled troubleshooting aside (already partially done via <details>) rather than bolding each as if it were a new taught concept would reduce the rubric's counted concept load without losing content. The page's Apply-level task (configuring a secret and editing frontmatter) is appropriate for a side quest, but it would benefit from a verification-based Apply activity, e.g., asking the learner to intentionally test the wrong name to see the failure, per active-recall principles in cognitive load research.

Improvement Prompt (for an agent):

Edit workshop/side-quest-11-06-anthropic-key.md to reduce counted concept density and raise
activity density:

1. In the existing "Common mistakes with this secret" <details> block, remove bold
   formatting from the four wrong-name code variants (anthropic_api_key, ANTHROPIC-API-KEY,
   CLAUDE_API_KEY) — list them as plain inline code without individually bolding the
   preceding label words, so they read as one troubleshooting list rather than four new
   taught concepts.

2. Add one short verification micro-task right after the "Compile your workflow" section:
   ask the learner to run `gh aw compile` once with a deliberately misnamed secret (or the
   secret temporarily removed) to see the expected failure message, then restore the correct
   secret and re-run. Wrap the expected failure text in a fenced code block so it also counts
   toward activity density.

3. Keep the existing Checkpoint section, the frontmatter example, and the "Common mistakes"
   content itself unchanged in substance — only remove excess bolding and add the one
   verification step.

4. Run `npx --yes markdownlint-cli2 "workshop/side-quest-11-06-anthropic-key.md"` and fix any
   lint errors introduced.

Expected Score After Fix: 6.2 / 10.0 (fewer counted concepts from de-bolded troubleshooting list, plus one added verification activity raising active_learning).

Generated by 🔬 Curriculum Quality Evaluator · copilot · auto · 90.7 AIC · ⌖ 21.1 AIC · ⊞ 9K · ◷

  • expires on Sep 26, 2026, 7:53 AM UTC
Lingua principale
JavaScript
Stelle
49
Fork
20
Merge medio
9h 44m
PR unite (30g)
25

Preparare l'ambiente

Non abbiamo ancora controllato i file di configurazione di questo progetto. Parti dal suo README e consulta la nostra guida al primo contributo per i passaggi generali.

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di githubnext/gh-aw-workshop

Tutte le issue di githubnext/gh-aw-workshop

Issue simili

Altre issue su JavaScript

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.