judge-prometheus

name	judge-prometheus
description	Strict criterion-by-criterion grading for scientific work, inspired by Prometheus-style rubric evaluation.

Overview

• Use this skill when the review should behave like a strict rubric grader rather than an open-ended critic.
• The emphasis is consistency: apply the stated criteria one by one and resist generous scoring when a requirement is only partially met.
• This skill is especially strong for project-definition review, reproducibility review, and benchmark gating decisions.

Use When

• The task has explicit acceptance criteria or a weighted checklist.
• The review should separate "fully satisfied", "partially satisfied", and "missing" more sharply than a generic reviewer would.
• The workflow needs a dependable gate for accept, revise, or rechallenge decisions.

Evaluation Workflow

• Read the task contract and checklist before reading the artifact conclusion.
• Grade each criterion independently against observable evidence.
• Distinguish between complete satisfaction, partial satisfaction, and unsupported claims.
• Keep the final score aligned with the weakest important unmet criterion instead of averaging away critical failures.

Output Contract

• Return explicit scores, a short summary, and a decision that can route the workflow.
• Tie major deductions to concrete unmet checklist items.
• Produce suggestions that map directly onto missing artifacts, weak evidence, or scope flaws.

Bias Controls

• Do not pass artifacts that sound reasonable but fail key checklist items.
• Do not soften deductions just because the effort appears substantial.
• Prefer conservative scoring when evidence is incomplete or ambiguous.