response-rater

📁 oimiragieo/agent-studio 📅 Jan 27, 2026
31
总安装量
3
周安装量
#12040
全站排名
安装命令
npx skills add https://github.com/oimiragieo/agent-studio --skill response-rater

Agent 安装分布

github-copilot 2
mcpjam 1
claude-code 1
junie 1
windsurf 1
zencoder 1

Skill 文档

Response Rater Skill

Step 1: Define Rating Rubric

Use appropriate rubric for the content type:

For Plans:

Dimension Weight Description
Completeness 20% All required sections present
Feasibility 20% Plan is realistic and achievable
Risk Mitigation 20% Risks identified with mitigations
Agent Coverage 20% Appropriate agents assigned
Integration 20% Fits with existing systems

For Responses:

Dimension Weight Description
Correctness 25% Technically accurate
Completeness 25% Addresses all requirements
Clarity 25% Easy to understand
Actionability 25% Provides clear next steps

Step 2: Evaluate Each Dimension

Score each dimension 1-10:

## Dimension Scores

### Completeness: 8/10

- Has objectives, steps, and timeline
- Missing risk assessment section

### Feasibility: 7/10

- Most steps are achievable
- Step 3 timeline is aggressive

### Risk Mitigation: 5/10

- Only 1 risk identified
- No mitigation strategies

### Agent Coverage: 9/10

- All steps have assigned agents
- Good agent-task matching

### Integration: 8/10

- Uses existing APIs
- Minor compatibility concerns

Step 3: Calculate Overall Score

Average the weighted scores:

Overall = (8×0.2) + (7×0.2) + (5×0.2) + (9×0.2) + (8×0.2) = 7.4/10

Step 4: Generate Recommendations

Provide actionable improvements:

## Recommendations

### High Priority

1. Add risk assessment section with 3-5 risks
2. Include mitigation strategies for each risk

### Medium Priority

3. Extend Step 3 timeline by 2 days
4. Add fallback plan for external API dependency

### Low Priority

5. Add success metrics for each step

Step 5: Make Pass/Fail Decision

Apply minimum score thresholds:

Task Type Minimum Score
Standard 7/10
Enterprise 8/10
Critical 9/10
## Decision

**Score**: 7.4/10
**Threshold**: 7/10 (Standard)
**Result**: PASS ✅

Plan approved with recommendations for improvement.

</execution_process>

<best_practices>

  1. Consistent Rubrics: Use same dimensions for comparable content
  2. Clear Thresholds: Define pass/fail criteria upfront
  3. Actionable Feedback: Provide specific improvements
  4. Prioritize Issues: Order recommendations by impact
  5. Document Rationale: Explain score justifications

</best_practices>

Rate this plan for user authentication implementation

Response:

## Plan Rating: User Authentication

### Scores

- Completeness: 8/10 - Good structure, missing tests section
- Feasibility: 9/10 - Realistic timeline and approach
- Risk Mitigation: 6/10 - Only 1 risk identified
- Agent Coverage: 9/10 - Good agent assignments
- Integration: 8/10 - Compatible with existing auth

### Overall: 8.0/10 ✅ PASS

### Top Recommendations

1. Add risk section with security and dependency risks
2. Include test plan for each authentication flow
3. Add rollback procedure for failed deployment

</usage_example>

Rules

  • Always use consistent rubric dimensions
  • Provide specific, actionable recommendations
  • Document score justifications

Memory Protocol (MANDATORY)

Before starting:

cat .claude/context/memory/learnings.md

After completing:

  • New pattern -> .claude/context/memory/learnings.md
  • Issue found -> .claude/context/memory/issues.md
  • Decision made -> .claude/context/memory/decisions.md

ASSUME INTERRUPTION: Your context may reset. If it’s not in memory, it didn’t happen.