Follow-up R2 from the microsoft/AI-Engineering-Coach exploration (docs/superpowers/explorations/2026-06-16-ai-engineering-coach-findings.md, issue #340).
Idea
The MS project ships ~45 anti-pattern rules across 5 practice-score categories (Prompt Quality, Session Hygiene, Code Review, Tool Mastery, Context Management). Treat that taxonomy as a cross-check checklist: walk it against our GC catalogue (skills/garbage-collection/references/gc-catalogue.md), governance anti-pattern gallery, and /assess evidence signals, and adopt — in our own falsifiable-constraint idiom — any genuinely-missing checks.
Scope
- Read the actual rule files in the MS repo (the README does not document the rule schema).
- For each MS rule, classify: already-covered / additive / not-applicable-to-our-substrate (many are session-log-based → defer to R1).
- Author any adopted checks as new GC rules or assessment signals.
Attribution
Ideas are not copyrightable. If any rule text is copied near-verbatim, add an MIT NOTICE in the same PR (see the findings doc's attribution section). Prefer re-deriving to copying.
Follow-up R2 from the microsoft/AI-Engineering-Coach exploration (
docs/superpowers/explorations/2026-06-16-ai-engineering-coach-findings.md, issue #340).Idea
The MS project ships ~45 anti-pattern rules across 5 practice-score categories (Prompt Quality, Session Hygiene, Code Review, Tool Mastery, Context Management). Treat that taxonomy as a cross-check checklist: walk it against our GC catalogue (
skills/garbage-collection/references/gc-catalogue.md), governance anti-pattern gallery, and/assessevidence signals, and adopt — in our own falsifiable-constraint idiom — any genuinely-missing checks.Scope
Attribution
Ideas are not copyrightable. If any rule text is copied near-verbatim, add an MIT
NOTICEin the same PR (see the findings doc's attribution section). Prefer re-deriving to copying.