Rubric
SkillDev toolsMeasurable criteria translating qualitative debate to quantitative scores
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the Rubric skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by simhacker/moollm in skills/rubric/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
"What gets measured gets managed."
Explicit criteria with weights translate qualitative debate into defensible scores.
Rubric Structure
rubric:
id: client-evaluation-v1
name: "Client Engagement Rubric"
version: 1.0
criteria:
resource_efficiency:
weight: 0.20
scale: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
description: "How well does this fit our current capacity?"
anchors:
5: "Perfect fit, no adjustments needed"
4: "Good fit, minor adjustments"
3: "Manageable, some reallocation"
2: "Difficult, significant changes"
1: "Would overwhelm current capacity"
risk_level:
weight: 0.30
scale: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
description: "What's the risk profile?"
anchors:
5: "Minimal risk, strong track record"
4: "Low risk, minor concerns"
3: "Moderate risk, manageable"
2: "Elevated risk, needs mitigation"
1: "High risk, major red flags"
strategic_alignment:
weight: 0.25
scale: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
description: "Does this advance our strategic goals?"
anchors:
5: "Core to our strategy"
4: "Strongly aligned"
3: "Compatible"
2: "Tangential"
1: "Misaligned"
stakeholder_impact:
weight: 0.25
scale: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
description: "How does this affect our stakeholders?"
anchors:
5: "Benefits all stakeholders"
4: "Benefits most, neutral for others"
3: "Mixed impact"
2: "Some stakeholders harmed"
1: "Significant negative impact"
thresholds:
accept: 3.5
reject: 2.0
review: [2.0, 3.5] # Between reject and accept
Scoring
evaluation:
rubric: client-evaluation-v1
subject: "Client X Engagement"
evaluator: independent # No debate context
scores:
resource_efficiency:
score: 4
rationale: "Good capacity fit, minor timeline adjustment"
risk_level:
score: 2
rationale: "Scope creep history is concerning"
strategic_alignment:
score: 4
rationale: "Aligns with growth goals"
stakeholder_impact:
score: 3
rationale: "Positive for team growth, stress for some"
weighted_total: 3.15 # Below accept threshold
recommendation: review
critique: |
Risk score of 2 dragging down overall.
If risk can be mitigated (milestone billing, scope boundaries),
score could reach 3.55 (accept).
Suggestion: Revise proposal with explicit risk mitigation.
Calculation
weighted_total = Σ (criterion_weight × criterion_score)
Example:
resource_efficiency: 0.20 × 4 = 0.80
risk_level: 0.30 × 2 = 0.60
strategic_alignment: 0.25 × 4 = 1.00
stakeholder_impact: 0.25 × 3 = 0.75
total = 0.80 + 0.60 + 1.00 + 0.75 = 3.15
Rubric Evolution
Rubrics improve over time:
rubric_history:
- version: 1.0
date: "2025-06-01"
note: "Initial version"
- version: 1.1
date: "2025-09-15"
changes:
- "Added 'stakeholder_impact' criterion"
- "Reweighted risk from 0.35 to 0.30"
reason: "Post-mortem showed we missed stakeholder effects"
- version: 1.2
date: "2026-01-05"
changes:
- "Refined risk anchors for scope creep"
reason: "Client X evaluation revealed gap"
Domain-Specific Rubrics
# rubrics/code-review-rubric.yml
rubric:
id: code-review-v1
criteria:
correctness: { weight: 0.30 }
readability: { weight: 0.20 }
maintainability: { weight: 0.20 }
performance: { weight: 0.15 }
test_coverage: { weight: 0.15 }
# rubrics/hiring-rubric.yml
rubric:
id: hiring-v1
criteria:
technical_skills: { weight: 0.30 }
collaboration: { weight: 0.25 }
growth_potential: { weight: 0.20 }
culture_add: { weight: 0.15 }
communication: { weight: 0.10 }
Commands
| Command | Action |
|---|---|
DEFINE RUBRIC [name] | Create new rubric |
SCORE [subject] AGAINST [rubric] | Evaluate against criteria |
COMPARE [a] [b] USING [rubric] | Side-by-side evaluation |
REVISE RUBRIC [changes] | Update rubric version |
Integration
graph LR
C[Committee Debate] --> O[Output]
O -->|THROW| E[Evaluator]
R[RUBRIC.yml] --> E
E --> S{Score}
S -->|≥ 3.5| A[Accept]
S -->|≤ 2.0| X[Reject]
S -->|between| REV[Review]
REV -->|critique| C
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 52
- Forks
- 5
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
rubric- Source
- github.com/simhacker/moollm