section-break-check
$
npx mdskill add lyndonkl/claude/section-break-checkEnforce section-break style matching post register automatically
- Detects essayistic or methodology content to apply correct breaks
- Reads style-guide.md for rhythm rules and break definitions
- Analyzes draft text for first-person narrative or technical markers
- Flags mixed registers and suggests appropriate section separators
SKILL.md
.github/skills/section-break-checkView on GitHub ↗
---
name: section-break-check
description: Verifies the section-break style in a substacker draft matches the post register — asterisks (* * *) for essayistic posts under 2500 words, H2 for methodology / how-to / technical posts. Flags mixed registers (H2 in a reflective essay, asterisks in a structured how-to). Per the style-guide rhythm rule. Use every draft. Trigger keywords: section break, asterisk, H2, headers, register, essayistic vs methodology.
---
# Section Break Check
## Table of Contents
- [The two registers](#the-two-registers)
- [Workflow](#workflow)
- [Worked example](#worked-example)
- [Guardrails](#guardrails)
**Related skills:** Called by Editor in structural pass. Reads `shared-context/style-guide.md` for the break rule.
## The two registers
From `style-guide.md`:
- **Essays (<1500 words, reflective register)**: no H1/H2 in body; use `* * *` between movements.
- **Essays (1500+ words)**: `* * *` preferred; H2 only if structured as a how-to.
- **Methodology / technical posts**: H2 is fine and often necessary.
- **Never use H3 or H4.**
How to detect register:
- **Reflective**: first-person throughout, confession or admission opener, narrative arc, no numbered steps, no code blocks, <2500 words.
- **Methodology**: numbered steps, code blocks, command invocations, technical diagrams, "how to X" or "building Y" framing.
- **Hybrid** (e.g., *Architecture, Not Prompting*): both analytical claim and how-to sections. H2 is acceptable here.
## Workflow
```
Section-break check draft D:
- [ ] Step 1: Detect register: reflective | methodology | hybrid
- [ ] Step 2: Scan for section breaks: count H1s, H2s, H3+, asterisk dividers
- [ ] Step 3: Apply register-appropriate rules
- [ ] Step 4: Flag mismatches
```
### Scoring matrix
| Register | Word count | H2 OK? | `* * *` OK? | Flag conditions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reflective | <1500 | No | Yes | H2 in body → tier-2 |
| Reflective | 1500–2500 | Avoid | Preferred | Frequent H2 → tier-2 |
| Hybrid | any | Yes | Yes | Mixing both in same section → tier-2 |
| Methodology | any | Yes | Rare | H3+ usage → tier-2 |
## Worked example
**Draft 1**: A 1200-word reflective essay on pathology AI with H2s (`## The Training Set`, `## The Failure`, `## What I Learned`).
**Flag**: (Tier-2) H2s in a short reflective post break register. Essays under 1500 words use `* * *`. Rewrite: replace each `## Heading` with `* * *` and fold the heading concept into the first sentence of the new movement.
**Draft 2**: A 3000-word methodology post on building an agent system with no H2s, only `* * *` dividers.
**Flag**: (Tier-2) Methodology register typically uses H2 for navigation. Consider H2 for each major step of the build. Not blocking, but worth the writer's attention.
**Draft 3**: A 1800-word essay mixing analysis with a concrete build walk-through, with both H2 and `* * *` (some sections have H2, some have asterisks).
**Flag**: (Tier-2) Mixing within one essay breaks register. Pick one. Rewrite suggestion: use H2 for the methodology sections and `* * *` for the analytical transitions — but be consistent within each register.
## Guardrails
1. Section-break issues are tier-2. Writer can publish anyway; it's a craft miss, not a voice violation.
2. Don't flag H1 in the draft — H1 is the post title and belongs there.
3. Don't flag section breaks in code blocks or quoted content.
4. H3+ is always flagged (style-guide rule: "Never use H3 or H4").
5. Series-log posts (frontmatter `series: {slug}`) typically use `* * *` — if a series post uses H2, flag softly.
6. Don't propose a full restructure; suggest the one change (replace H2 with `* * *` or vice versa) and let the writer execute.
## Quick reference
- Detect register → apply rule.
- Two tolerated registers: reflective (asterisks) and methodology (H2).
- Mixed within one essay = tier-2 flag.
More from lyndonkl/claude
- abstraction-concrete-examplesBuilds structured abstraction ladders that translate high-level principles into concrete, actionable examples across 3-5 levels. Bridges communication gaps, reveals hidden assumptions, and tests whether abstract ideas work in practice. Use when explaining concepts at different expertise levels, moving between abstract principles and concrete implementation, identifying edge cases by testing ideas against scenarios, designing layered documentation, decomposing complex problems into actionable steps, or bridging strategy-execution gaps.
- academic-letter-architectGuides the creation of evidence-based academic recommendation letters, reference letters, and award nominations that combine concrete examples, meaningful comparisons, and genuine enthusiasm. Use when writing recommendation letters for students, postdocs, or colleagues, or when user mentions recommendation letter, reference, nomination, letter of support, endorsement, or needs help with strong advocacy and comparative statements.
- adr-architectureDocuments significant architectural and technical decisions with full context, alternatives considered, trade-offs analyzed, and consequences understood. Creates a decision trail that helps teams understand why decisions were made. Use when choosing between technology options, making infrastructure decisions, establishing standards, migrating systems, or when user mentions ADR, architecture decision, technical decision record, or decision documentation.
- adverse-selection-priorProduces a Bayesian prior probability that an offered transaction is +EV for the recipient, given that the counterparty chose to propose it. Applies Akerlof market-for-lemons logic -- if they offered it, they believe it is +EV for them, so the prior that it is +EV for us is materially below 50%. Reusable across trade evaluation, waiver drops (another team dropping a player is also adverse selection), job-offer analysis, M&A, and any "someone offered me this" situation. Use when you receive an unsolicited trade/offer/proposal, analyzing incoming trade prior, evaluating why a counterparty proposed a deal, or when user mentions adverse selection, market for lemons, why did they offer this, incoming trade prior, they proposed it, Bayesian adjustment on received offer.
- alignment-values-north-starCreates actionable alignment frameworks that give teams a shared North Star (direction), values (guardrails), and decision tenets (behavioral standards). Enables autonomous decision-making while maintaining organizational coherence. Use when starting new teams, scaling organizations, defining culture, establishing product vision, resolving misalignment, creating strategic clarity, or when user mentions North Star, team values, mission, principles, guardrails, decision framework, or cultural alignment.
- analogy-weight-checkFor every analogy in a substacker draft, verifies it carries mechanical weight — the analogy does real work explaining the mechanism, not merely decorates it. Cross-references analogy-catalog.md for novelty (is this analogy reused from a prior post?) and domain fit (biology > organizational > sports preferred; physics/military disfavored). Use whenever an analogy appears in the draft. Trigger keywords: analogy weight, decorative, mechanical weight, reused analogy, catalog check, metaphor check.
- answer-uncomfortable-questionTakes one strategic question about substacker ("should we launch paid?", "is this section dead?", "are we writing for the wrong audience?") and produces the mandatory evidence + reasoning + downside triad plus a recommendation. Used 3 times per Growth Strategist review. Trigger keywords: uncomfortable question, strategic question, evidence reasoning downside, triad.
- attribute-performanceFor each substacker post that materially over- or under-performs the rolling baseline (|z| ≥ 1.0), produces a plain-English attribution paragraph with calibrated confidence (high / medium / low / unexplained). Considers subject-line effect, topic zeitgeist, external share, day-of-week, length effect, and audience-notes signals. Labels unexplained outliers explicitly rather than fabricating a story. Use after compute-baseline when outlier posts exist. Trigger keywords: attribution, why did this post work, outlier explanation, performance analysis.
- auction-first-price-shadingComputes the optimal shaded bid for a first-price sealed-bid auction given a true private value, an estimate of the number of competing bidders N, and a value-distribution assumption. Implements the `(N-1)/N` equilibrium shading rule for uniform private values, adjusts for log-normal or empirical value distributions, layers a risk-aversion adjustment, and caps output against the bidder's remaining budget. Domain-neutral auction theory reusable across fantasy sports (baseball FAAB, NBA/NHL waiver auctions), prediction-market limit sizing, sealed procurement bids, and any blind-bid context. Use when user mentions "first-price auction bid", "sealed bid shading", "(N-1)/N", "FAAB bid amount", "auction shading", "optimal bid first-price", "bid for sealed-bid", "blind bid sizing", or when downstream logic needs a principled shade factor rather than an ad-hoc heuristic.
- auction-winners-curse-haircutApplies a Bayesian haircut to a bid valuation for common-value auctions where winning is itself evidence the bidder over-estimated. Takes a raw valuation, a value-type classification (common_value / private_value / mixed), the number of informed bidders N, and a signal-dispersion estimate, and returns an adjusted valuation. Domain-neutral and reusable across fantasy FAAB, prediction markets, M&A bids, ad-auction budgets, and any generic bidding context. Use when user mentions "winner's curse", "common value auction", "valuation haircut", "adverse valuation", "Bayesian bid adjustment", or "over-paying in auction".