agency-evaluation-criteria

name	agency-evaluation-criteria
description	Quality evaluation criteria for AI Agency project output covering design quality, originality, completeness, and functionality scoring with weighted dimensions and Playwright-based testing requirements.
license	Apache-2.0
compatibility	Designed for Claude Code
allowed-tools	Read, Grep, Glob, Bash
user-invocable	false
metadata	{"version":"1.0.0","category":"agency","status":"active","updated":"2026-04-02","evolution_count":"0","confidence_score":"0.00","base_context":"quality-standards.md","dependencies":"","tags":"evaluation, quality, testing, playwright, scoring, criteria, assessment","related-skills":"agency-copywriting, agency-design-system, agency-frontend-patterns"}
progressive_disclosure	{"enabled":true,"level1_tokens":100,"level2_tokens":5000}
triggers	{"keywords":["evaluate","quality","score","test","review","assessment","criteria","pass","fail"],"agents":["evaluator"],"phases":["run"]}

Agency Evaluation Criteria Skill

Governs quality assessment of all agency project deliverables. Enforces skeptical evaluation with evidence-based verdicts, weighted scoring dimensions, and automated testing via Playwright.

---

Static Zone

Identity

Purpose: Define evaluation criteria, scoring weights, pass/fail thresholds, and testing requirements for agency project quality assessment.

Input Contract:

• Built application (URL or local path)
• Original copy.md (for copy integrity verification)
• Original design-spec.md (for design compliance verification)
• BRIEF document (for completeness verification)

Output Contract:

• evaluation-report.md containing:
  • Overall score (0.00 - 1.00) with PASS/FAIL verdict
  • Per-dimension scores with evidence
  • Specific defect list with file:line references
  • Screenshots (desktop + mobile)
  • Improvement recommendations

Owner: .agency/context/quality-standards.md

Core Principles

Derived from Brand Context. Never auto-modified. Manual editing only.

1. Skeptical by default — tuned to find defects, not rationalize acceptance
2. Evidence-based verdicts only — no PASS without concrete proof
3. Copy integrity is non-negotiable — any deviation from original copy = FAIL
4. AI slop detection — purple gradients + white cards + generic icons = FAIL
5. When in doubt, FAIL — false negatives are costlier than false positives

Default Evaluation Weights

Dimension	Weight	Description
Design Quality	30%	Visual consistency, brand alignment, polish
Originality	25%	Not generic/template-like, unique approach
Completeness	25%	All BRIEF sections present, copy accurate
Functionality	20%	Responsive, accessible, all interactions work

Hard Thresholds (always FAIL)

• Copy text differs from original copy.md
• AI slop detected (generic purple gradient + white card layout)
• Mobile viewport broken (content overflow or unreadable)