eval-document

name	eval-document
description	Evaluate loaded documents against a criteria file, producing a structured findings report. Use when the user asks to "evaluate", "review", or "check" documents against criteria.
argument-hint	[criteria-file]

Evaluate Document

Evaluate loaded documents against a criteria file, producing a structured findings report.

Instructions

1. Gather evidence. Run the eval script to search for relevant clauses per criterion:

   uv run --with 'chromadb,sentence-transformers' \
       "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/eval-document/document-eval.py" "$ARGUMENTS"
   

   Default criteria: assets/criteria/general-red-flags.md

2. Assess each criterion. The script outputs evidence grouped by criterion. For each criterion, read the evidence and apply judgment:

   • Rate severity: CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW, or CLEAR
   • Quote the specific clause text
   • Note which source document(s) the finding comes from
   • Explain your reasoning

3. Produce the report:

   # Document Evaluation Report
   
   **Criteria file:** <path>
   **Date:** <date>
   **Documents searched:** <count>
   **Clauses searched:** <count>
   
   ## Summary
   
   | # | Criterion | Severity | Source Files | Sections |
   |---|-----------|----------|-------------|----------|
   | 1 | ...       | CRITICAL | RFP 20-020.pdf | 4.1, 12.12 |
   
   ## Detailed Findings
   
   ### 1. <Criterion Name>
   
   **Severity:** CRITICAL
   **Source:** RFP 20-020 Document.pdf
   **Sections:** 4.1, 12.12
   **Evidence:** > "quoted clause text..."
   **Finding:** <explanation>
   

Available criteria files

• assets/criteria/ip-and-ownership.md — focused IP review (3 criteria)
• assets/criteria/general-red-flags.md — broad scan (6 criteria)
• Custom: any markdown file with ## headings as criteria

Constraints

• Documents must be loaded first
• Always cite section numbers, source documents, and quote clause text as evidence
• Rate conservatively — only use CRITICAL for genuine contradictions or impossibilities
• If a criterion finds no issues, rate it CLEAR and say so explicitly
• Look for cross-document contradictions (e.g., main RFP vs addenda)