solution-evaluation

To evaluate a design document against a quality rubric, apply a five-dimension scoring framework covering structure, semantic accuracy, business rules, compliance, and overall quality. This generates a formal assessment with a badcase list and surface reasons to guide improvements.

Identifying gaps in a design proposal during a phase review requires checking alignment with the spec, coverage of key concepts, and consistency of design decisions. This evaluation outputs a formal report detailing bad cases and surface reasons for improvement opportunities.

No, this evaluation cannot perform root-cause analysis on bad design decisions. It explicitly produces a badcase list with surface reasons to identify gaps and improvement opportunities, but does not provide root-cause analysis or prompt-diagnosis guidance.

A multi-dimension rubric assesses semantic accuracy and compliance in architecture notes by enforcing scoring across five specific dimensions. It checks alignment with the spec, coverage of key concepts, and consistency of design decisions to produce a formal quality assessment.

You need a formal quality assessment for design.md outputs during design-phase reviews of design proposals and architecture notes. Applying a five-dimension rubric ensures your documentation meets structure, semantic accuracy, business rules, compliance, and overall quality standards.

No, the design evaluation skill requires no external dependencies or components to run. You can integrate the evaluation rubric directly into your design review workflow to assess design documents and generate badcase lists without additional environment setup.