diff --git a/resources/03 Put it into practice/3-assessment_content.md b/resources/03 Put it into practice/3-assessment_content.md
index 69cdc2a..83cfb9e 100644
--- a/resources/03 Put it into practice/3-assessment_content.md	
+++ b/resources/03 Put it into practice/3-assessment_content.md	
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ To perform FAIR assessment one can use a FAIR software checklist and manually go
       - [howfairis](https://github.com/fair-software/howfairis)
       - [isseven](https://github.com/meadsteve/isseven)
 
-2. Use the developed FAIR software checklist to assess the FAIRness of the chosen software object
+2. Use the FAIR software checklist developed by FAIR-IMPACT to assess the FAIRness of the chosen software object
     - analyse each item of the following table by paying attention to the requirements, method, essential, important and useful aspects
     - note that the specification for each of the metrics is available in [D5.2 - Metrics for automated FAIR software assessment in a disciplinary context](https://zenodo.org/records/10047401), chapter 2 Metric Specification page 12
 
@@ -73,11 +73,19 @@ To perform FAIR assessment one can use a FAIR software checklist and manually go
 | **FRSM-17** | Does the software include provenance information that describe the development of the software? |
 
 3. Use an automated tool to assess the software FAIRness
+    - Although there are FAIR assessment tools for data, few are currently available for assessing software. 
+    - Some examples of FAIR assessment tools for software that you can try include:
+       - [FAIR Software Checklist](https://fairsoftwarechecklist.net/): this is a web checklist that asks you 15 questions about your software. This is similar to the FAIR-IMPACT metrics.
+       - F-UJI: web version designed for data, though can be used for software. A software specific set of metrics is being implemented.
+       - howfairis: Python tool that needs to be installed on your computer. Doesn't directly assess against the FAIR for research software principles.
 
-4. Compare the results from both approaches
+5. Compare the results from both approaches
     - discuss any problems or doubts during the process
+    - what metrics did you find most useful to consider?
+    - what metrics did you find hardest to check?
+    - what metrics would you change to be more useful for your community / discipline?
 
-5. Prepare for retrospective
+6. Prepare for retrospective
     - what are your main impressions of this activities in 2-3 sentences
     - choose a group representatives that will share these impressions with the rest of the workshop participants