remove folder - untrustworthy

worker-toolkit-stocks-in-the-future/.claude/skills/detector-meaningful-failure/SKILL.md

@@ -1,65 +0,0 @@
----
-name: detector-meaningful-failure
-description: |
-  Self-check whether your task tests a real, proportionate, actually-elicited
-  failure. Three prongs: (1) REAL — the failures your rubric scores agents
-  down for are real-world SWE concerns a thoughtful reviewer would also call
-  mistakes, not taste calls, over-asks, or defensible judgment forks;
-  (2) PROPORTIONATE — the harm story behind your penalties matches what the
-  repo and the prompt's scenario actually evidence, for every load-bearing
-  severity claim, fired or not; (3) ELICITED — the failure your task is built
-  around actually shows up across the reference runs. Run this after you have
-  reference runs so the detector can read the grader's per-run reasoning.
-allowed-tools: Bash, Read, Write
----
-
-# Meaningful-failure detector
-
-This skill checks one of your tasks against the three-prong quality bar:
-the rubric points at something *real* (a concrete SWE mistake, not nitty,
-subjective, or a defensible judgment call), the stakes it claims are
-*proportionate* (the harm story survives a check against the repo and the
-prompt's scenario), and the failure is actually *elicited* (it manifests
-across the reference runs — a task whose runs all score high with the
-central target never firing documents competent behavior instead of
-exposing a weakness). Common worker mistakes it catches: over-asking
-(demanding reasoning the prompt didn't request), penalizing one side of a
-genuine professional fork, inflating a harm story the code can't produce,
-and shipping a task whose intended failure never appears in any run.
-
-**This detector needs reference runs.** Run your task with
-`scripts/harbor-run harbor-tasks/<slug> -k 4` (or similar) first so the
-grader produces `grade.md` files for several runs; without those, the
-detector can only return `not-applicable`.
-
-Read these before deciding:
-
-1. `.claude/skills/_detector-worker-shell.md` — where to write the report and how to handle re-runs.
-2. `.claude/skills/detector-meaningful-failure/core.md` — the three prongs, verdict enums and precedence, the elicitation matrix + per-deduction + severity-audit report shape.
-
-Compose the report per the schema in `core.md` and write it per `_detector-worker-shell.md`.
-
-## Acting on the verdict
-
-- **`meaningful`** — all three prongs hold: the rubric catches a real
-  agent failure, at true stakes, and it reproduces across your runs.
-  Good. Move on to the other detectors.
-- **`partial`** — one prong is diluted. Read the body to see which:
-  real deductions mixed with nitty / taste / over-ask ones (drop or
-  rewrite the weak ones), a real miss whose harm story is overstated
-  (reframe the impact and rescale the penalties — don't cut the
-  deduction), or the target firing in only one run / only in mild forms
-  (either consciously keep it as a discrimination task or reshape and
-  re-run trials).
-- **`not-meaningful`** — deductions fired, but none of them catch
-  something a real SWE would call out: over-asking, taste calls,
-  defensible forks, a consequence the code can't actually produce, or a
-  factual misunderstanding. Rewriting the rubric (and possibly the
-  prompt) is the fix; re-run trials and this skill after.
-- **`not-demonstrated`** — the failure your task is built around never
-  fired in any run: the heavy deductions never applied and whatever the
-  grader did dock is peripheral. The runs document competent behavior.
-  Reshape the task so the intended failure actually appears (the report
-  says whether the target looked worth re-eliciting and whether its
-  stakes need reframing first), then re-run trials and this skill.
-- **`not-applicable`** — no reference runs yet. Run trials first.