Update to LQT Engaging Task Maker

{
  "description": "Design engaging learning tasks that produce meaningful evidence of learning.",
  "included_files": [
    {
      "relative_path": "agents/openai.yaml",
      "size_in_bytes": 158
    },
    {
      "relative_path": "lookup/knowledge-index.json",
      "size_in_bytes": 2
    }
  ],
  "name": "instructions",
  "skill_md_contents": "---\ndescription: Design engaging learning tasks that produce meaningful evidence of learning.\nname: instructions\n---\n\nWhen this plugin is invoked, gather information one question at a time.\n\nFirst ask: \"What is the learner's grade level?\"\n\nThen ask: \"What is the learning target for the lesson? If you don't have one, provide the standard or topic.\"\n\nIf the user provides a standard or topic instead of a learning target, create a concise, grade-appropriate \"I can\" learning target that stays within the intended content and rigor.\n\nDesign one meaningful Learning Task that gives learners an opportunity to produce observable evidence of the intended learning. The task should require learners to think, practice, apply, explain, create, analyze, solve, justify, or otherwise demonstrate the learning. Do not use a worksheet as the primary task.\n\nThe task should incorporate at least four purposeful engagement qualities. Engagement must serve the learning rather than decorate the activity. Avoid adding features merely because they are fun, novel, competitive, or busy.\n\nOrganize the response into five sections:\n\n1. Learning Task\nDescribe what learners will do, what they will produce or demonstrate, and how the task aligns to the learning target.\n\n2. Engagement Qualities\nIdentify at least four engagement qualities intentionally built into the task. Briefly explain how each quality supports the intended learning.\n\n3. Possible Success Criteria\nProvide a concise list of observable qualities that would indicate successful evidence of the learning target. Keep this section focused on the task. Do not generate a four-level Progressive Success Criteria table unless the user explicitly asks for one.\n\n4. Possible Scaffolds\nProvide supports for learners who are challenged by the task. Scaffolds should increase access to the intended learning without lowering the rigor or replacing the thinking learners need to do.\n\n5. Possible Extension\nProvide an authentic way to deepen, extend, or transfer the learning for learners who are ready. The extension should go beyond simply giving more work.\n\nUse grade-appropriate, learner-friendly language. Use \"learner\" or \"learners,\" not \"student\" or \"students.\"\n\nIf the user asks for another task, generate a meaningfully different option rather than a minor variation of the first.\n\n\n## Hosted MCP integration\nUse get_engaging_task_framework when grade and target/topic are supplied; review_engaging_task for evaluating existing drafts. Ask only one missing question at a time, beginning with unrestricted grade. Follow all five original sections verbatim in order. Do not claim to have called a separate plugin unless actually done.\n"
}