[curriculum-eval] side-quest-17-07-repo-poisoning.md: cognitive_load — 1,234 words and concept overload in one exercise
维护者通常 1 天内回复
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
评估
- 难度
- 2/5
- 预计耗时
- 1-3 小时
- 新手友好度
- 76/100
- Issue 类型
- 文档
- 描述清晰度
- 描述清楚
- 活跃度
- 活跃
- 技术栈
- github-actions, markdown
- 领域
- content, documentation
调研方向
阅读 workshop/side-quest-17-07-repo-poisoning.md，并检查 Before You Start 和 Checkpoint 部分。加强对攻击的说明，将关于 protected-files 和 network.allowed-domains 的内容移到 Go further 部分或后续任务中，并添加一个可运行的 workflow 步骤。完成标准是练习少于约 900 词，引入的新概念不超过 15 个，且活动密度至少达到每 100 词 3 项；提示还提到了 workshop/README.md 和 markdownlint。
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
描述
File: workshop/side-quest-17-07-repo-poisoning.md
Overall Score: 4.95 / 10.0 (corpus mean: 6.06)
Flagged Dimensions:
| Dimension | Score | Benchmark | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| cognitive_load | 5.8 | 10 (≤ 800 words, ≤ 15 concepts) | −4.2 (1,234 words, concept_overload flagged) |
| active_learning | 2.7 | 10 (density ≥ 3) | −7.3 |
(The missing_checkpoint flag is a false positive — a 6-item Checkpoint exists at line 191; see the rubric-regex issue.)
Root Cause (≤ 2 sentences):
The page introduces the attack, the contents: read / safe-outputs: create-pull-request defences, protected-files, and network.allowed-domains in one sitting. Only 6 checklist items and a few code blocks offset ~1,200 words of explanation.
Evidence (quoted from the file):
- I can name the two gh-aw features (
contents: readandsafe-outputs: create-pull-request) that remove the direct-commit path
Learning Science Rationale:
Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller) and the segmenting principle (Mayer) predict better retention when a complex topic is broken into learner-paced chunks; splitting attack explanation from the defensive exercise lets each part carry a focused practice activity.
Improvement Prompt (for an agent):
Edit workshop/side-quest-17-07-repo-poisoning.md to bring it under ~900 words and ≤ 15 new concepts: tighten the attack narrative, move the `protected-files` and `network.allowed-domains` hardening into a collapsible <details> "Go further" section or a follow-on side quest (update workshop/README.md if a file is added), and add one more runnable step (e.g. compile the hardened workflow and inspect the generated lock file) so activity density is ≥ 3 per 100 words. Keep Before You Start and Checkpoint sections, use only [!NOTE]/[!TIP] callouts, then run `npx --yes markdownlint-cli2 "**/*.md"`.
Expected Score After Fix: 6.8 / 10.0 (rubric as-is); about 8.8 once the checkpoint regex is fixed
Generated by 🔬 Curriculum Quality Evaluator · copilot · auto · ~42 AIC · ⌖ ~1 AIC · ⊞ 5K · ◷
- expires on Oct 29, 2026, 3:35 AM UTC
- 主要语言
- JavaScript
- 星标
- 56
- 派生
- 40
- 平均合并
- 2 天 14 小时
- 30 天内合并 PR
- 13
环境准备
在浏览器里用你自己的 GitHub 账号启动这个项目的开发容器。
- 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
- 没有 Pull Request 模板
- 没有贡献指南
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
githubnext/gh-aw-workshop 的其他 Issue
-
curriculum documentation quality
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 74/100
githubnext/gh-aw-workshop#5224 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
curriculum documentation quality
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 65/100
githubnext/gh-aw-workshop#5222 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
curriculum documentation quality
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 78/100
githubnext/gh-aw-workshop#5218 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
[ordering-review] workshop order graph: 1 early-reference issue, 2 missing next links, loops benign未关闭
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
githubnext/gh-aw-workshop#5212 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
[ordering-review] workshop order graph: 1 confirmed ordering issue, 3 loops reviewed as intentional未关闭
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
githubnext/gh-aw-workshop#5211 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
查看 githubnext/gh-aw-workshop 的全部 Issue
相似的 Issue
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 70/100
hexlet-codebattle/codebattle#2374 ·
-
难度 1/5 1 小时以内 新手友好度 78/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
security
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 62/100
Waschndolos/open-clubmanager#185 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
维护者通常 6 天内回复
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 70/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复