Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

verify-content

@rhpds/aap-selfserv-intro-showroom
1
0

Run comprehensive quality verification on workshop or demo content using Red Hat standards and validation agents.

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name verify-content
description Run comprehensive quality verification on workshop or demo content using Red Hat standards and validation agents.

context: fork model: sonnet hooks: PreToolUse: - .claude/hooks/validate-paths.sh

Content Verification Skill

Verify workshop or demo content against Red Hat quality standards, style guidelines, technical accuracy, and accessibility requirements.

When to Use

Use this skill when you want to:

  • Verify workshop content before publishing
  • Check demo modules for quality and completeness
  • Validate technical accuracy and Red Hat style compliance
  • Review content for accessibility standards
  • Get actionable feedback on content improvements

Don't use this for:

  • Creating new content → use /create-lab or /create-demo
  • Converting between formats → use /blog-generate

Workflow

Step 1: Identify Content Type

Q: What type of content are you verifying?

Options:

  1. Workshop module (hands-on lab content)
  2. Demo module (presenter-led demonstration)
  3. Multiple files (specify pattern)

Step 2: Locate Content

For single file:

  • Provide file path (e.g., content/modules/ROOT/pages/module-01-install-aap.adoc)

For multiple files:

  • Provide glob pattern (e.g., content/modules/ROOT/pages/*.adoc)
  • Or directory path (e.g., content/modules/ROOT/pages/)

Step 3: Run Verification Agents

I'll run comprehensive verification using these validation frameworks:

For Workshop Content:

  1. enhanced_verification_workshop.txt - Overall quality assessment
  2. redhat_style_guide_validation.txt - Red Hat style compliance
  3. verify_workshop_structure.txt - Workshop structure validation
  4. verify_technical_accuracy_workshop.txt - Technical accuracy
  5. verify_accessibility_compliance_workshop.txt - Accessibility standards
  6. verify_content_quality.txt - General content quality

For Demo Content:

  1. enhanced_verification_demo.txt - Overall demo quality
  2. redhat_style_guide_validation.txt - Red Hat style compliance
  3. verify_technical_accuracy_demo.txt - Demo technical accuracy
  4. verify_accessibility_compliance_demo.txt - Accessibility standards
  5. verify_content_quality.txt - General content quality

Step 4: Present Results

I'll provide:

Summary Report:

  • Overall quality score
  • Critical issues (must fix)
  • Warnings (should fix)
  • Recommendations (nice to have)

Detailed Findings:

  • Specific file locations
  • Before/after examples
  • Implementation steps
  • Priority levels

Actionable Items:

  • Numbered list of fixes
  • Links to relevant documentation
  • Estimated effort level

Step 5: Offer Fixes (Optional)

After showing results, I can:

  • Apply fixes automatically (with your approval)
  • Provide code snippets for manual fixes
  • Explain why each change improves quality

Example Usage

Example 1: Verify Single Workshop Module

User: /verify-content

Skill: What type of content are you verifying?
User: Workshop module

Skill: File path?
User: content/modules/ROOT/pages/module-01-install-aap.adoc

[Runs all workshop verification agents]

Skill:
📊 Verification Results for module-01-install-aap.adoc

**Overall Score**: 82/100

**Critical Issues** (3):
1. Missing verification commands in Exercise 2 (line 145)
2. Incorrect Red Hat product name: "OCP" should be "Red Hat OpenShift" (line 67)
3. Missing alt text for screenshot placeholder (line 203)

**Warnings** (5):
1. Troubleshooting section could be more comprehensive
2. Learning outcomes section recommended but missing
3. Some commands lack expected output examples

**Recommendations** (2):
1. Add time estimates for each exercise
2. Include references section with documentation links

Would you like me to apply fixes automatically? [Yes/Show details/Manual fixes]

Example 2: Verify All Modules in Workshop

User: Verify all my workshop modules

Skill: Content location?
User: content/modules/ROOT/pages/

[Scans and finds 3 modules + index/overview]

Skill: Found 5 files:
- index.adoc
- 01-overview.adoc
- 02-details.adoc
- module-01-install-aap.adoc
- module-02-configure-aap.adoc

Verify all? [Yes/Select specific files]

User: Yes

[Runs verification on all files]

Skill:
📊 Batch Verification Results

**Summary**:
- 5 files verified
- Average score: 78/100
- 12 critical issues across all files
- 23 warnings
- 15 recommendations

**Top Issues**:
1. Inconsistent heading styles across modules (affects: all modules)
2. Missing Red Hat style compliance in 3 files
3. No accessibility alt text in 8 image references

**Per-File Scores**:
- index.adoc: 85/100 ✓
- 01-overview.adoc: 90/100 ✓
- 02-details.adoc: 88/100 ✓
- module-01-install-aap.adoc: 72/100 ⚠️
- module-02-configure-aap.adoc: 65/100 ⚠️

Would you like detailed report for specific files? [Enter file numbers or 'all']

Verification Standards

Every verification includes:

Red Hat Style Guide:

  • ✓ Sentence case headlines
  • ✓ Official Red Hat product names
  • ✓ No prohibited terms (whitelist/blacklist, etc.)
  • ✓ Proper hyphenation and formatting
  • ✓ Serial comma usage

Technical Accuracy:

  • ✓ Valid commands for current versions
  • ✓ Correct syntax and options
  • ✓ Working code examples
  • ✓ Accurate technical terminology

Workshop Quality (for labs):

  • ✓ Clear learning objectives
  • ✓ Step-by-step instructions
  • ✓ Verification commands with expected outputs
  • ✓ Troubleshooting guidance
  • ✓ Progressive skill building

Demo Quality (for demos):

  • ✓ Know/Show structure
  • ✓ Business value messaging
  • ✓ Presenter guidance
  • ✓ Visual cues for slides/diagrams
  • ✓ Quantified metrics and ROI

Accessibility:

  • ✓ Alt text for all images
  • ✓ Proper heading hierarchy
  • ✓ Clear, inclusive language
  • ✓ Keyboard-accessible instructions

Content Quality:

  • ✓ Complete prerequisites
  • ✓ Consistent formatting
  • ✓ Proper AsciiDoc syntax
  • ✓ References and citations
  • ✓ Professional tone

Output Format

Results are presented in clear, actionable format:

## Critical Issues (Must Fix)

### 1. Missing Verification Commands
**File**: module-01-install-aap.adoc:145
**Impact**: Learners can't verify success, leading to confusion

**Current**:
```asciidoc
. Deploy the AutomationController:

Fixed:

. Deploy the AutomationController:
+
[source,bash]
----
oc get automationcontroller -n ansible-automation-platform
----
+
Expected output:
----
NAME                  STATUS   AGE
platform-controller   Running  5m
----

How to fix:

  1. Add verification command after deployment step
  2. Include expected output
  3. Add success indicator

Warnings (Should Fix)

1. Incomplete Troubleshooting Section

File: module-01-install-aap.adoc:250 Impact: Reduces learner independence

Recommendation: Add 3-5 common issues with solutions ...


## Quality Gates

Content passes verification when:
- ✓ Overall score ≥ 80/100
- ✓ Zero critical issues
- ✓ All Red Hat style violations fixed
- ✓ Technical accuracy confirmed
- ✓ Accessibility standards met

## Integration with Other Skills

**After `/create-lab`**:
- Run verification on generated module
- Apply fixes before committing
- Ensure quality standards met

**After `/create-demo`**:
- Verify Know/Show structure
- Check business messaging
- Validate presenter guidance

**Before publishing**:
- Final verification of all content
- Batch check entire workshop
- Generate quality report

## Tips for Best Results

**Be specific about content type**:
- Workshop modules use different standards than demos
- Infrastructure files (nav.adoc, README.adoc) have different requirements

**Review before auto-fix**:
- Understand why changes are recommended
- Some fixes may need manual adjustment
- Technical accuracy requires domain knowledge

**Run verification regularly**:
- After creating new modules
- Before submitting PRs
- After major content updates

## Quality Standards

Every verification run checks:
- ✓ Red Hat brand compliance
- ✓ Technical accuracy for current versions
- ✓ Accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA)
- ✓ Learning effectiveness
- ✓ Professional formatting
- ✓ Complete documentation
- ✓ Consistent style

## Files Used

**Verification prompts** (in `.claude/prompts/`):
- `enhanced_verification_workshop.txt`
- `enhanced_verification_demo.txt`
- `redhat_style_guide_validation.txt`
- `verify_workshop_structure.txt`
- `verify_technical_accuracy_workshop.txt`
- `verify_technical_accuracy_demo.txt`
- `verify_accessibility_compliance_workshop.txt`
- `verify_accessibility_compliance_demo.txt`
- `verify_content_quality.txt`

**Reference examples**:
- `content/modules/ROOT/pages/workshop/example/`
- `content/modules/ROOT/pages/demo/`