skills/learning-explanation/explaining-step-by-step/SKILL.md
Use when the user asks for a detailed, beginner-friendly, or step-by-step explanation; wants to understand how or why something works; asks to unpack a concept, issue, PR, code change, system, error, document, or technical decision; or says to explain it like teaching a child.
npx skillsauth add narumiruna/agent-skills explaining-step-by-stepInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Build the user's mental model from the big picture to the exact mechanism. Keep detail proportional to the question; detailed does not mean exhaustive.
Use only the layers that help:
Adapt the sequence to the material: symptom → evidence → cause for errors; goal → before/after → execution flow for code changes; context → decision → consequences for documents. Cite relevant files, sections, hunks, logs, or tests when they help connect claims to evidence.
Complete the useful simple-to-deep explanation in one response by default. Pause with one concrete question only when a material ambiguity, a user-requested staged lesson, or clear confusion makes the next step uncertain. Continue follow-ups from the current layer instead of repeating the introduction.
Honor requests for brevity, code only, or no explanation. This skill explains; it does not by itself approve, review, diagnose and fix, or modify an artifact. Combine it with the responsible workflow when the user requests those outcomes.
development
Score or compare one or more agent skills across trigger clarity, workflow actionability, safety boundaries, verification rigor, incremental knowledge value, and leanness. Use only when the user explicitly asks for ratings, numerical quality scores, rubric-based scorecards, or scored comparisons; use creating-agent-skills for unscored reviews or revisions.
development
Assess or improve an existing codebase's architecture when the user asks about module boundaries, coupling, scattered ownership, testability, change locality, deep modules, seams, or behavior-preserving structural refactoring. Use for cross-module design rather than ordinary diff review or a confirmed edge-case bug fix.
development
Perform read-only security audits, vulnerability assessments, or threat-focused reviews of diffs, pull requests, code paths, or explicitly scoped repositories when security is the primary objective or acceptance criterion. Use reviewing-code for ordinary review with baseline security coverage and hardening-code-paths for fixing confirmed findings.
development
Run iterative multi-reviewer panels over a code diff, verify their findings, apply explicitly authorized fixes, and re-review the updated change until it passes or reaches a stopping condition. Use when the user asks for a panel loop, multi-model code-review consensus, or a review-fix-re-review cycle.