Dispositional Knowledge Assessment Designer Agent Skill

Design multi-informant assessment approaches for dispositional competencies like curiosity or resilience.

Context cost
18.3k tokensestimated from the bundle, loaded when it triggers
Bundle
1 file · 73.3 kBtext throughout, nothing executable
Licence
not declarednone named by its author
Last change
—v1.0
Servers it uses
Noneruns standalone

What it does

Design multi-informant assessment approaches for dispositional competencies like curiosity or resilience. Use when assessing character strengths or competencies that written tests cannot capture.

What this skill changes about the agent has not been set out here as a list. Its SKILL.md, shown below, says it in the author’s own words.

agencyassessmentcoaching-feedbackcollaborationdevelopmental-bandsdispositional-knowledgemulti-informantself-regulation

The skill itself

A skill is instructions the model reads, so you can see what you are getting: below is the start of its SKILL.md. The front matter loads with every session, the body loads when the skill triggers, and the whole file comes with the install.

SKILL.md73.3 kB · preview
--- # AGENT SKILLS STANDARD FIELDS (v2) name: dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer disable-model-invocation: true user-invocable: true effort: medium # EXISTING FIELDS skill_id: "original-frameworks/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer" skill_name: "Dispositional Knowledge Assessment Designer" domain: "original-frameworks" version: "1.0" evidence_strength: "moderate" evidence_sources: - "Domitrovich, Durlak, Staley & Weissberg (2017) — Social-emotional competence: multi-informant assessment across contexts" - "Greenberg, Domitrovich, Weissberg & Durlak (2017) — SEL as a public health approach: triangulation of teacher, parent, and student report" - "CASEL (2013) — CASEL Guide: five-domain SEL framework and multi-informant assessment architecture" - "Zimmerman (2000) — Attaining self-regulation: developmental readiness for self-assessment and feedback" - "Zimmerman (2002) — Becoming a self-regulated learner: dispositions as assessable and teachable" - "Hattie & Timperley (2007) — The power of feedback: self-level feedback least effective; self-regulation feedback most powerful" - "Deci & Ryan (1985, 2000) — Self-Determination Theory: autonomy-supportive assessment preserves intrinsic motivation" - "Amabile (1979, 1993) — Evaluation expectation suppresses authentic expression; informational feedback synergises with intrinsic motivation" - "Krechevsky, Mardell, Rivard & Wilson (2013) — Visible Learners: documentation as assessment of dispositional qualities" - "Kluger & DeNisi (1996) — Feedback Intervention Theory: self-directed feedback decreases performance; task/process-directed feedback improves it" - "Boud & Molloy (2013) — Feedback as developmental dialogue, not transmission" input_schema: required: - field: "competency_name" type: "string" - field: "competency_definition" type: "string" - field: "band" type: "string" - field: "band_descriptors" type: "string" - field: "assessment_context" type: "string" optional: - field: "existing_observation_data" type: "string" - field: "student_self_assessment_data" type: "string" - field: "parent_input" type: "string" - field: "school_feedback_structure" type: "string" output_schema: type: "object" fields: - field: "observation_protocol" type: "object" - field: "student_self_reflection_tool" type: "object" - field: "parent_caregiver_input_guide" type: "object" - field: "synthesis_guide" type: "object" - field: "developmental_conversation_guide" type: "object" - field: "feedback_structure_integration" type: "object" chains_well_with: - "learning-target-authoring-guide" - "coherent-rubric-logic-builder" - "developmental-band-system-designer" - "curriculum-knowledge-architecture-designer" - "kud-knowledge-type-mapper" teacher_time: "5 minutes" tags: ["dispositional-knowledge", "assessment", "multi-informant", "coaching-feedback", "developmental-bands", "agency", "collaboration", "self-regulation", "observation", "self-reflection"] ---
89# Dispositional Knowledge Assessment Designer
90
91## What This Skill Does
92
93Guides a teacher through designing a complete assessment approach for dispositional knowledge — competencies like agency, collaboration, self-regulation, creative confidence, and regenerative mindset — where the "knowledge" exists only in enactment and cannot be separated from the learner's growing capability. This skill explicitly does NOT produce a rubric. Rubrics are appropriate for hierarchical and horizontal knowledge, where criteria-referencing is legitimate and a student can demonstrate competency through a specific task. Dispositional knowledge requires a fundamentally different assessment architecture: multi-informant evidence (teacher observation, student self-reflection, and optionally parent/caregiver input), developmental band descriptors used as shared vocabulary rather than summative criteria, and coaching-modality feedback calibrated to the learner's developmental stage. The output is an observation protocol, a student self-reflection tool, a parent/caregiver input guide, a synthesis guide for triangulating evidence, and a developmental conversation guide — everything a teacher needs to assess dispositional development with integrity. AI is specifically valuable here because designing assessment for dispositional knowledge requires simultaneously applying developmental psychology (what can a student at this stage meaningfully self-assess?), motivation theory (how to assess without undermining the disposition being assessed), and assessment design expertise (how to triangulate multiple evidence sources) — a combination that is rare and that most teachers have received no training in.
94
95## Evidence Foundation
96
97Dispositional knowledge — agency, collaboration, ecological literacy, entrepreneurial thinking, self-regulation — presents an assessment challenge that conventional approaches cannot solve. A rubric that rates a student's "agency" from 1 to 5 commits several errors simultaneously: it treats an enacted disposition as a fixed trait, it implies that a summative judgment is valid when the disposition may manifest differently across contexts, and it risks undermining the very motivation and psychological safety that dispositional development requires.
98
99**Multi-informant assessment.** Domitrovich, Durlak, Staley & Weissberg (2017) demonstrated that social-emotional competence is context-sensitive — a student may demonstrate strong collaboration in one setting and weak collaboration in another — which means assessment from any single informant is necessarily incomplete. Greenberg, Domitrovich, Weissberg & Durlak (2017) argued that because dispositional competencies manifest differently across settings (school, home, peer contexts), valid assessment requires triangulation of teacher observation, student self-report, and parent/caregiver input. The CASEL (2013) framework operationalised this by specifying five SEL competency domains (self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, responsible decision-making) observable across different contexts — establishing the architecture for multi-informant dispositional assessment. The key insight is not that three reports are better than one because of statistical averaging, but that each informant sees the disposition in a different context, and the pattern across contexts IS the evidence.
100
101**Developmental readiness for self-assessment.** Zimmerman (2000) showed that self-regulation develops through a cyclical process — forethought, performance, self-reflection — and that learners at different developmental stages have qualitatively different capacities to reflect on their own dispositions. A Band A student (ages 5–7) can report on concrete actions ("I helped Mia today") but cannot meaningfully evaluate their own dispositional development. A Band D student (ages 12–14) can engage in genuine metacognitive self-assessment — comparing their current patterns to past behaviour, identifying contexts where a disposition is stronger or weaker, and setting development goals. Zimmerman (2002) further established that the dispositions underlying self-regulation are both assessable and teachable, but that the assessment method must match the learner's developmental capacity. This means the self-reflection tool must be calibrated to the band — simple and concrete at Band A, metacognitive and comparative at Band D.
102
103**Feedback that preserves motivation.** Hattie & Timperley (2007) found that feedback at the self level ("You are a good collaborator") is the least effective type, while feedback at the self-regulation level ("I notice you checked with your team before making that decision — that's a pattern I've seen developing") is among the most powerful. Kluger & DeNisi (1996), in a meta-analysis of 607 effect sizes, found that more than one-third of feedback interventions actually decreased performance — specifically those that directed attention toward the self rather than the task or process. This finding is critical for dispositional assessment: feedback about who a student IS (evaluative) undermines performance, while feedback about what a student DOES (developmental) improves it. Deci & Ryan (1985, 2000) established through Self-Determination Theory that assessment contexts which feel controlling — where the student perceives judgment rather than support — directly undermine the autonomy and competence needs that dispositional development requires. Amabile (1979) demonstrated experimentally that the expectation of external evaluation suppresses authentic expression, while Amabile (1993) distinguished controlling feedback (which undermines intrinsic motivation) from informational feedback (which can synergise with it). The implication for dispositional assessment is precise: the assessment process must feel like coaching, not grading. If a student experiences dispositional assessment as judgment, they will perform the disposition rather than develop it.
104
105**Documentation as assessment.** Krechevsky, Mardell, Rivard & Wilson (2013) argued through Project Zero's Making Learning Visible initiative that documentation — photographs, transcripts, recorded conversations, collections of student work — constitutes a form of assessment that makes dispositional qualities (persistence, curiosity, risk-taking, collaboration) visible in ways that tests and rubrics cannot. Documentation serves three accountability functions: to self (reflective practice), to the learning community (shared inquiry), and to families (evidence of growth). This approach treats assessment as an act of noticing and recording rather than measuring and scoring — a fundamental reorientation that aligns with the nature of dispositional knowledge.
106
107**Coaching vs evaluative feedback.** Boud & Molloy (2013) redefined feedback as a process that produces action — information that results in no change is not feedback in any educationally meaningful sense. This reframing shifts dispositional assessment from judgment (rating a student) to developmental dialogue (co-constructing understanding of growth and next steps). The coaching modality — where the teacher facilitates the student's own reflection rather than delivering a verdict — is structurally incompatible with summative evaluation. The two cannot occupy the same conversation without the evaluative role undermining the psychological safety required for honest self-disclosure and dispositional growth.
This is a preview of SKILL.md. Download or install the skill to get the whole thing.
In the file
SKILL.md10,544 words
Files1
Licencenot declared
Why you can read it

Nothing in a skill executes. The client loads the text and the model follows it, so a skill can be audited the way a runbook is — by reading it.

What it costs in context

Skills are not billed by the call. They are paid for in context: every token the instructions occupy is a token your code, your diff and your conversation cannot use. Here is what this one takes and when it takes it.

≈1,270
always loaded
The name and description, so the model knows the skill exists and when to reach for it.
17,055
on trigger
The instruction body, read only when the skill fires.
9.2%
of a 200k window
Ten skills this size would take about 92% of the window before you open a file.
050k100k150k200k context window

18.3k tokens, estimated from the bundle at four bytes to the token, held for the rest of the session once it triggers. Heavy. Teams tend to install this one per project rather than globally, and load it only when the job comes up.

Servers bill, skills cost

A server charges by the month. A skill charges once per session, in context, and then keeps charging it for as long as the session lives.

Before and after

The same question, put to the same model twice: once as it comes, and once with these instructions loaded.

No worked example has been published for this skill yet.

The procedure it runs

The procedure has not been set out here step by step. It is in the body of its SKILL.md: the start of it is shown above, and the whole file comes with the install.

Prose, not code

These steps are written for a model to follow, not executed by a runtime. It can still be told to skip one, and it will say so when it does.

Servers it uses

None. This skill calls no MCP servers at all.

Everything it needs is in the instructions, so it works in a project with nothing connected — the model reads the file and changes how it works with what it can already reach.

Its SKILL.md does not declare which tools it asks the agent for, so what it touches is whatever the instructions themselves ask for — read them before you install it.

What it asks for
Writes filesnot declared
Network accessnot declared

This SKILL.md carries no allowed-tools line, so neither is declared. A skill grants no permissions of its own — it can only ask for tools your client already has.

What it will not do

Every skill is narrow, and the useful ones say where they stop. These are the jobs this one is the wrong tool for.

What this skill is not for has not been published here. Nothing is implied by that: it is a section the author has not filled in.

What is in the bundle

1 file, 73.3 kB on disk. A bundle is text throughout: the instructions the model reads, plus the templates it fills in.

  • SKILL.md73.3 kB
What is not in it

No dependencies and nothing executable: a skill is text the agent reads, so the bundle is 1 file you can review in full before installing.

Install

Installing copies the bundle into your project. Nothing runs at install time — the files sit on disk until the model reads them.

# Dispositional Knowledge Assessment Designer · 18.3k tokens when loaded · macOS, Linux mkdir -p .claude/skills && t=$(mktemp -d) && curl -fsSL -o "$t/bundle.tar.gz" https://mcprush.com/api/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer/bundle.tar.gz && tar -xzf "$t/bundle.tar.gz" -C "$t" && [ -d "$t/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer" ] && { [ ! -e .claude/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer ] || { mv .claude/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer "$t/.previous" && echo "Previous copy moved to $t/.previous"; }; } && mv "$t/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer" .claude/skills/ && echo "Installed .claude/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer"
On Windows, or any OS with Node 20+
npx mcprush@latest skill add garethmanning/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer

Windows PowerShell says 'running scripts is disabled on this system'? Run Set-ExecutionPolicy -Scope CurrentUser RemoteSigned once, or type npx.cmd instead of npx (codex.cmd, gemini.cmd, grok.cmd likewise). PowerShell 7 needs neither. Writes to .claude/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer/ in the current project. For every project instead, run mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && t=$(mktemp -d) && curl -fsSL -o "$t/bundle.tar.gz" https://mcprush.com/api/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer/bundle.tar.gz && tar -xzf "$t/bundle.tar.gz" -C "$t" && [ -d "$t/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer" ] && { [ ! -e ~/.claude/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer ] || { mv ~/.claude/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer "$t/.previous" && echo "Previous copy moved to $t/.previous"; }; } && mv "$t/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer" ~/.claude/skills/ && echo "Installed ~/.claude/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer" (macOS, Linux) — or add --global to the npx line. The curl line replaces .claude/skills/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer/ only after the download succeeds, so files left there by another skill of the same name, or by an older release, do not mix in. A copy already there is moved aside, not deleted, and the line prints where.

Which clients pick it up on their own

A skill is a folder of text. Most of these read a skills folder and pick it up without being told; the rest take the same folder another way — an upload in the app, a parameter on an API call — and then choose it by its description just the same.

Claude Code.claude/skills/
Claude DesktopCustomize › Skills
ChatGPTSkills › Create › Upload
Cursor.cursor/skills/
VS Code.github/skills/
Codex CLI.agents/skills/
Gemini CLI.gemini/skills/
Grok Build.grok/skills/
Microsoft CopilotSkills › Upload a skill
PerplexityComputer › Skills › Upload a skill
DeepSeek Harness.dsh/skills/
Zed.agents/skills/
Devin Desktop.devin/skills/
Windsurf (legacy).windsurf/skills/
OpenAI Agents SDKInstructions or sandbox Skills
HTTP / APIa request parameter
This release
Version1.0
Publishedno release date on file
PriceFree
Referencegarethmanning/dispositional-knowledge-assessment-designer

Versions

v1.0 is what is on the shelf; no release here carries a date. Instructions change more often than APIs do — a skill can be rewritten entirely without anything it depends on moving.

v1.0
  • No earlier releases have been published to the marketplace.
Pinning

The install command always fetches the release that is current the day you run it — v1.0 today — and cannot ask for an earlier one. The copy on your disk does not change until you run it again.

Reviews

—no reviews yet

Nobody has reviewed this skill yet. The rating is the mean of the reviews written here, so there is none until somebody writes the first.

Sign in to review it

A review is tied to an account so it can be answered, edited and taken down by the person who wrote it.

Sign in
Who can post

Anybody with an account, one review each. It carries the version that was current when you wrote it, and the publisher may reply once.

Publisher
Servers0
Claim this skill