Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

nw-tr-review-criteria

Review dimensions and scoring for root cause analysis quality assessment

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md3.7 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Troubleshooter Review Criteria

Review dimensions and scoring for root cause analysis quality assessment.

Dimension 1: Causality Logic

Check each WHY-to-WHY link.

Pass: logical mechanism (not just correlation) | no skipped steps | alternatives considered/eliminated | chain reads coherently both directions

Failures: correlation assumed as causation | causal chain gaps | single-path tunnel vision (first plausible cause accepted)

Severity: Critical -- wrong root cause = ineffective fixes.

Dimension 2: Evidence Quality

Verify findings grounded in observable data.

Pass: each WHY cites specific evidence (logs, metrics, config, repro steps) | evidence verifiable by third party | timeline supports causality | hypotheses marked unverified

Failures: "Probably because..." without data | vague references ("logs show issues") | mixing facts with speculation unlabeled

Severity: High -- unreliable analysis undermines trust.

Dimension 3: Alternative Hypotheses

Verify competing explanations explored.

Pass: 2+ alternatives at WHY 1-3 | each pursued or eliminated with evidence | "why not" reasoning documented

Failures: stops at first plausible cause | alternatives mentioned but unevaluated | confirmation bias

Severity: High -- may miss actual root cause.

Dimension 4: Five-WHY Depth

Verify analysis reaches fundamental causes.

Pass: each branch reaches WHY 5 (or justifies stopping with evidence) | final causes are actionable | causes explain symptoms when traced forward

Failures: stopping at WHY 2-3 | WHY 5 vague/philosophical not actionable | branches abandoned

Severity: High -- shallow analysis = band-aid fixes that recur.

Dimension 5: Completeness and Coverage

Verify all symptoms accounted for.

Pass: all symptoms have causal branch | root causes collectively explain all | no orphan symptoms | cross-cause validation (no contradictions)

Failures: symptoms ignored | root causes explain primary but not secondary | contradictory causes without reconciliation

Severity: Medium -- incomplete analysis leaves unaddressed failures.

Dimension 6: Solution Traceability

Verify solutions map to root causes.

Pass: every root cause has solution | immediate mitigations vs permanent fixes distinguished | no orphan solutions | prevention addresses systemic factors

Failures: solutions address symptoms not causes | root cause without fix | generic recommendations untied to findings

Severity: Medium -- untraceable solutions are guesses.

Review Output Format

review_id: "rca_rev_{timestamp}"
reviewer: "nw-troubleshooter-reviewer"

dimensions:
  causality_logic:
    score: 0-10
    issues: [{issue, severity, recommendation}]
  evidence_quality:
    score: 0-10
    issues: [{issue, severity, recommendation}]
  alternative_hypotheses:
    score: 0-10
    issues: [{issue, severity, recommendation}]
  five_why_depth:
    score: 0-10
    issues: [{issue, severity, recommendation}]
  completeness:
    score: 0-10
    issues: [{issue, severity, recommendation}]
  solution_traceability:
    score: 0-10
    issues: [{issue, severity, recommendation}]

overall_score: "average of dimension scores"
approval_status: "approved | revisions_required"
summary: "1-2 sentence assessment"

Scoring Guide

  • 9-10: Exemplary. No issues or minor style only.
  • 7-8: Good. Minor issues not affecting conclusions.
  • 5-6: Adequate. Issues weaken but don't invalidate.
  • 3-4: Poor. Issues may lead to incorrect conclusions.
  • 1-2: Failing. Fundamental flaws invalidate analysis.

Approval threshold: overall >= 7 and no dimension below 5.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Review dimensions for validating agent quality - template compliance, safety, testing, and priority validation

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

nWave-ai/nWave622Updated Sep 16, 2026

Review dimensions for validating agent quality - template compliance, safety, testing, and priority validation

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

nWave-ai/nWave622Updated Sep 16, 2026

Review dimensions for acceptance test quality - happy path bias, GWT compliance, business language purity, coverage completeness, walking skeleton user-centricity, priority validation, observable behavior assertions, traceability coverage, and walking skeleton boundary proof

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

nWave-ai/nWave622Updated Sep 16, 2026

Detailed 5-phase workflow for creating agents - from requirements analysis through validation and iterative refinement

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

nWave-ai/nWave622Updated Sep 16, 2026

5-layer testing approach for agent validation including adversarial testing, security validation, and prompt injection resistance

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

nWave-ai/nWave622Updated Sep 16, 2026

Architectural style selection decision matrices, trade-off analysis, structural enforcement rules, and combination patterns. Load when choosing or evaluating architecture styles.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

nWave-ai/nWave622Updated Sep 16, 2026

See all skills by nWave-ai

Report a problem with this skill