AgentStack
SKILL verified Apache-2.0 Self-run

Writing Rubrics

skill-jkeskikangas-skills-writing-rubrics · by jkeskikangas

>

No reviews yet
0 installs
19 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-jkeskikangas-skills-writing-rubrics

✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • Network access No
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets No
  • Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

Are you the author of Writing Rubrics? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Writing Rubrics

Objective

Create or update rubric documents in this repo and keep their integration points in sync:

  • Rubric files (typically under */references/*rubric*.md)
  • Reviewer report templates (typically */references/review-template.md)
  • Reviewer prompts (*/agents/openai.yaml)

When to use / When not to use

Use when:

  • The user asks to create, edit, align, or consolidate rubric files (especially */references/*rubric*.md).
  • The user asks to sync rubric expectations with reviewer templates (**/references/review-template.md) or reviewer prompts (**/agents/openai.yaml).

Do not use when:

  • The user wants a rubric-only review/grade without editing (use the review prompt at [references/review-prompt.md](references/review-prompt.md) directly).
  • The user wants to write a non-rubric skill or policy doc unrelated to rubric meta-patterns.

Safety / Constraints (non-negotiable)

  • Never read, request, or paste secrets.
  • Do not browse the web or call external systems unless the user explicitly requests it.
  • Keep diffs small: change only the rubric meta-pattern or the user-requested rubric content.
  • Before making bulk edits across multiple rubrics/templates, summarize the planned changes and get approval.

Quality Bar (default)

Target outcome:

  • No spec violations, and
  • Weighted score ≥ 4.5/5.0 (grade A), and
  • No P1 findings in a critic review

The review prompt (contains scoring dimensions and review workflow): [references/review-prompt.md](references/review-prompt.md) (single source of truth for grading rubric documents). The review report template: [references/review-template.md](references/review-template.md).

Canonical Rubric Meta-Pattern (repo default)

Apply these conventions across rubrics unless a rubric explicitly documents a justified exception:

  • Grade bands
  • A: 4.5–5.0
  • B: 3.5–4.49
  • C: 2.5–3.49
  • D: 1.5–2.49
  • F: ` on any skill directories that will be modified.
  • Only run the linter with --fix after summarizing the expected file changes and getting explicit user approval (it writes files).
  1. Apply changes (write)
  • Update rubric(s) to match the canonical meta-pattern.
  • If a rubric requires a domain-specific verification section, keep it domain-specific but enforce the evidence rule.
  1. Sync integration points (write)
  • Ensure reviewer templates include a “Verification Results” section if the rubric expects evidence-backed checks.
  • Ensure reviewer prompts mention the correct rubric path(s).
  1. Validate
  • If preflight reports drift, propose the smallest set of edits to resolve it (by file), then re-run the preflight.
  • For any changed skill directories, run both linters on each:
  • node packages/skillcheck/bin/skillcheck.js
  • npx agnix

Quality Gate

Two-phase review after validation. Target: Quality Bar (score >= 4.5, no P1 findings).

Phase 1: Self-critic review

Review the changed rubric(s) and integration points for:

  • Internal consistency — grade bands, P-definitions match the canonical meta-pattern.
  • Completeness — all dimensions have 1/3/5 criteria.
  • Cross-reference accuracy — reviewer templates/prompts reference correct rubric paths.

Fix inline or flag. If score < 4.5 or P1 findings remain, fix before proceeding to Phase 2.

Phase 2: Fresh-context subagent review

Run a fresh-context critic pass using [references/review-prompt.md](references/review-prompt.md):

  • If your environment supports subagents, spawn a fresh-context subagent with the review prompt. Otherwise, perform the review directly following the prompt instructions.
  • Apply P1 + P2 fixes (P3 last).
  • Re-run validation.
  • Repeat up to 3 loops, stop early when the Quality Bar is met.

Edge Cases

  • Linters not available (no Node.js / npx): warn the user; skip validation but note it was skipped in the deliverable.
  • No rubric files found: stop and ask the user for the correct path(s) before proceeding.

Examples

  • "Use $writing-rubrics to create a new rubric for reviewing deployment configs."
  • "Use $writing-rubrics to align all rubrics in this repo to the canonical meta-pattern."
  • "Use $writing-rubrics to sync the reviewer template with the updated skills-rubric.md."

Output Rules

  • Keep rubric prose dense and scannable (tables/bullets preferred).
  • Avoid time-sensitive claims unless the rubric explicitly requires web browsing and says so.

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet — be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.