_agent-evaluation-aesthetics

Agent definition aesthetics checks identify readability and style issues by evaluating naming compliance, opening clarity, writing precision, filler content, and consistency with Gobbi style patterns. They report actionable findings in a structured format.

Writing precision checks in agent definitions look for vague qualifiers, abstract nouns, passive voice, and unnecessary padding. Removing these filler elements improves contributor comprehension and ensures reliable agent behavior.

Naming convention compliance checks verify that the agent name matches the filename and follows Gobbi's established naming conventions. This enforces frontmatter requirements and reports discrepancies in a structured findings format.

Contributor comprehensibility evaluation assesses whether a new contributor can summarize the agent's purpose, identify critical prohibitions, and foresee extension points. It reviews opening clarity and role embodiment from the first paragraph.

Style consistency checks ensure adherence to Gobbi patterns for blockquotes, headings, and lists. This coherence evaluation enforces the frontmatter requirements and findings structure described in the style guide.

Aesthetics checks are limited to readability, naming, style, and clarity issues within agent definitions. They do not evaluate functional agent behavior or runtime performance, focusing solely on documentation and contributor comprehensibility.