eval-materials-vs-build

name	eval-materials-vs-build
description	Scores how faithfully a recorded build run aligned with the course materials, in the spec-build-lab. Use this skill ANY time the user asks to evaluate, score, check, judge, or compare a specific build run AGAINST THE COURSE — including phrasings like "evaluate run-02 against the materials", "score run-02 against the course", "is run-02 faithful to the course", "did the build match the course", "course alignment check on run-NN", "how does run-02 compare to the notebooks and transcripts", "is the build aligned with what the course taught", "run a materials-vs-build eval", or "/eval-materials-vs-build run-NN". Reads materials/notebooks/, materials/transcripts/, and builds/<run>/, then writes evals/<run>/materials-vs-build.md. Requires an explicit run-NN; if none is given, list the runs in builds/ and ASK which one — never default. Do NOT use this skill to evaluate against spec.md — that's /eval-spec-vs-build, a different reference and different question.
argument-hint	<run-NN>
allowed-tools	["Read","Write","Glob","Grep","Bash"]

eval-materials-vs-build

Compare a recorded run's app against the original course materials. Course alignment only. Spec fidelity is /eval-spec-vs-build.

Steps

1. Verify cwd is a course folder. Confirm spec.md, materials/, builds/, evals/ exist. Refuse otherwise.
2. Require a run. If $ARGUMENTS is empty:

   ls -1 builds/ 2>/dev/null | grep -E '^run-[0-9]+$' | sort
   

   List those runs and ask which one. Never default.
3. Validate the run. Confirm builds/$ARGUMENTS/ is a non-empty directory. Refuse otherwise. The report reflects whatever the build folder contains — evaluating an in-progress run is fine; just re-run after the build finishes for a clean score.
4. Read the inputs.
   • Materials: every non-empty file under materials/notebooks/ and materials/transcripts/.
   • Build: walk builds/$ARGUMENTS/ (skip node_modules, .venv, dist, build, .git, and anything matching its own .gitignore).
5. Produce the report at evals/$ARGUMENTS/materials-vs-build.md with sections:
   • Summary — one-paragraph verdict on course faithfulness.
   • Concept coverage — concepts/techniques the materials taught → present / partial / missing in the build, with file references.
   • Divergences from the course — what the build did that the materials never covered (this can be fine, but call it out).
   • Course concepts skipped — what the course emphasized that the build ignored.
   • Score — judgment on a 0–10 scale, with reasoning.
6. Report the path written, then hand off. After echoing the report path, tell the user: "Course-alignment report written. The companion eval is /eval-spec-vs-build $ARGUMENTS — different reference, different question (spec fidelity, not course alignment). Say 'go ahead' to run it next, or skip if you've already done it."

Don't

• Don't read evals/$ARGUMENTS/spec.md or the top-level spec.md — that collapses this eval into /eval-spec-vs-build. Different reference, different question.
• Don't default a run. List the runs in builds/ and ask the user which one.
• Don't penalize the build for not implementing something the materials didn't actually cover — that belongs in the spec eval.