263 skills · sorted by relevance
Use when loading, listing, composing, or validating graded evaluation rubrics — PASS/WARN/FAIL grading with weighted criteria and balanced PASS/FAIL anchor examples. Triggers on /mk:rubric, "load rubric", "compose rubric preset", "validate rubric", or evaluator-style code review that needs anchor-grounded judgments.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Evaluate a Claude Managed Agent against a written rubric, a set of checkable criteria, and guide improvements within a fixed attempt limit. After a version passes, prepare separate evaluation cases to check performance beyond the examples used for revision.
Build a five-level rubric with coherent logic for a learning target within a developmental band. Use for Manning methodology programmes where Competent = success. For general curriculum rubrics, use criterion-referenced-rubric-generator instead.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Build a five-level rubric with coherent logic for a learning target within a developmental band. Use for Manning methodology programmes where Competent = success. For general curriculum rubrics, use criterion-referenced-rubric-generator instead.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
提议并执行 rubric 或 bucket 升级。两种模式：**完整 rubric bump**（最高风险动作，5 步强制 + 跨模型审核）和 **--bucket-only 轻量重校**（只换 bucket 边界，不动 rubric 公式）。**Phase 2 强制走 cheat-score-blind sub-agent 给校准池重打分**——不接受 self-scored fallback。触发词："升级 rubric"/"bump rubric"/"更新公式"/"我想加一个维度"/"调整权重"/"重校桶"/"recalibrate bucket"。
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
rubric変更を提案するとき、rubric改正を施行するときに使う。
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Design structured evaluation rubrics for scoring LLM and agent outputs — defining quality dimensions, scoring scales, hard gates, score descriptions, and edge cases. Load when the user asks to create an eval rubric, define evaluation criteria, design scoring dimensions, write an eval spec, or says "what should I evaluate", "design a rubric", "create eval criteria", "define quality dimensions", "evaluation rubric for", "how do I measure quality of". Sub-skill of eval-output orchestrator.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Generate a criterion-referenced rubric with descriptive performance levels for a task or objective. Use for marking guides and general curriculum contexts. For Manning programmes where Competent = success, use coherent-rubric-logic-builder instead.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Iterative rubric-based evaluation and self-improvement loop. Builds a scoring rubric interactively, evaluates an artifact with multiple models in parallel (Codex, Gemini, Claude), then autonomously improves the artifact one criterion at a time until a score threshold is met or circuit breaker fires. "/rulph", "rubric evaluate", "rubric score", "multi-model evaluate", "score and improve", "evaluate and iterate", "grade this", "루브릭 루프", "채점 루프", "자율 개선", "개선 루프", "루브릭 평가"
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Generate a criterion-referenced rubric with descriptive performance levels for a task or objective. Use for marking guides and general curriculum contexts. For Manning programmes where Competent = success, use coherent-rubric-logic-builder instead.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
並列監査 + 全修正 + 検証の一気通貫レビュー。--rubric-path=<rubric.md> でゴール条件を注入可能。--auto-approve でサブエージェント向け対話スキップ + 構造化 JSON 出力モード
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Design a single-point rubric with one criterion and open columns for evidence. Use for student self-assessment, peer feedback, teacher formative feedback, or pre-task planning. Works with any learning target, with or without a band system.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Design a single-point rubric with one criterion and open columns for evidence. Use for student self-assessment, peer feedback, teacher formative feedback, or pre-task planning. Works with any learning target, with or without a band system.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Audit essays, reports, literature reviews, dissertations, proposals, and source-backed assignments for high-score academic quality. Use when the user asks whether a paper can get a high grade, wants teacher/rubric feedback addressed, needs a pre-submission review, or needs checks for strict rubric compliance, academic standards, prompt/rubric alignment, argument quality, comparative analysis, evidence hierarchy, table/figure integration, citation specificity, conclusion strength, academic language, source-claim integrity, or evidence boundaries.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Author and run offline evals for Agentforce agents: fixture format, scoring rubrics, hallucination checks, regression baselines, CI integration, prompt-change safety. Trigger keywords: agent eval, hallucination, doesn't hallucinate, agentforce offline evals, rubric for agent response. NOT for deciding which layers of testing the agent needs — use agentforce/agentforce-testing-strategy. NOT for Testing Center, AiEvaluationDefinition or sf agent test runs — use agentforce/agent-testing-and-evaluation.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Use when testing whether the jevaluate rubric and instructions lead graders to the right answers: after a rubric or instruction change, before freezing a rubric, before publishing ratings, or when a grader's calls look wrong.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
トリアージで影響ありと判定された spec-drift issue の rubric/schema/template を同期したいとき、propose(read-only)で最小 Edit 差分と pre-image hash を提案し apply で監査 PASS と明示承認後に allowlist 対象だけを適用したいときに使う。
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
新規ドメイン用L1 rubricを作成したいとき、ドメイン特化評価基準を雛形から派生させたいときに使う。
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
タスク仕様書ドメイン用L1 rubricを参照したいとき、Phase 1-13/SRP/ユビキタス言語の評価基準を確認したいときに使う。
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Generate the success criteria for a task or question, then review work against them. Given a task, goal, or open-ended question, decompose it into scenarios, evaluation perspectives, and fine-grained weighted YES/NO criteria using the Recursive Expansion Tree (RET) method; if work is supplied, score it criterion-by-criterion and surface what is missing or could be better. Use when asked to self-review or check your own work, judge whether a task is done well or completely, build a definition-of-done or completeness checklist, create an evaluation rubric or grading criteria, score or grade answers to a question, set up an LLM-as-judge rubric, or when the user mentions self-review, completeness check, success criteria, evaluation criteria, scoring rubric, Qworld, or the RET algorithm.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Score LLM and agent outputs using LLM-as-judge techniques — direct scoring against rubrics or pairwise comparison between two outputs. Includes built-in bias mitigation for position bias, length bias, and self-enhancement bias. Load when the user asks to score an output, judge a response, evaluate against a rubric, compare two outputs, do direct scoring, run pairwise comparison, or says "rate this", "which response is better", "score this against the rubric", "judge this output", "LLM as judge this". Sub-skill of eval-output orchestrator.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Review papers, drafts, and research ideas with evidence-linked feedback focused on improvement. Audit low-stakes assessment rubrics, trace supporting evidence, and check rater agreement and uncertainty without ranking people or recommending consequential decisions.
Generate independent options for design, implementation, explanations, or debugging, then compare them using one shared rubric. Code candidates use separate working copies and undergo independent verification before a winner is presented for review.
Creates a hiring packet from a role brief: a job post, interview guide with scoring criteria, and offer letter template. Can also prepare a DocuSign draft for review before the user approves sending it.