modify skill and plugin

2026-05-13 22:27:48 +09:00
parent d414338780
commit 2d59191df2
24 changed files with 2051 additions and 1 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
+# AGENTS.md Quality Criteria
+
+## Scoring Rubric
+
+### 1. Commands and Workflows - 20 points
+
+20 points: all essential commands documented with context.
+
+- Build, test, lint, format, dev, and deploy commands are present when relevant.
+- Development workflow is clear.
+- Common operations and verification expectations are documented.
+
+15 points: most commands present, some missing context.
+
+10 points: basic commands only, little workflow.
+
+5 points: few commands, many missing.
+
+0 points: no commands documented.
+
+### 2. Architecture Clarity - 20 points
+
+20 points: clear codebase map.
+
+- Key directories explained.
+- Module relationships documented.
+- Entry points identified.
+- Data flow described where relevant.
+
+15 points: good structure overview, minor gaps.
+
+10 points: basic directory listing only.
+
+5 points: vague or incomplete.
+
+0 points: no architecture info.
+
+### 3. Non-Obvious Patterns - 15 points
+
+15 points: gotchas and quirks captured.
+
+- Known issues documented.
+- Workarounds explained.
+- Edge cases noted.
+- Unusual "why this way" rules explained briefly.
+
+10 points: some patterns documented.
+
+5 points: minimal pattern documentation.
+
+0 points: no patterns or gotchas.
+
+### 4. Conciseness - 15 points
+
+15 points: dense, valuable content.
+
+- No filler or obvious info.
+- Each line adds value.
+- No redundancy with code comments or README basics unless Codex specifically needs it.
+
+10 points: mostly concise, some padding.
+
+5 points: verbose in places.
+
+0 points: mostly filler or restates obvious code.
+
+### 5. Currency - 15 points
+
+15 points: reflects current codebase.
+
+- Commands work as documented.
+- File references are accurate.
+- Tech stack and architecture are current.
+
+10 points: mostly current, minor staleness.
+
+5 points: several outdated references.
+
+0 points: severely outdated.
+
+### 6. Actionability - 15 points
+
+15 points: instructions are executable.
+
+- Commands can be copied and run.
+- Steps are concrete.
+- Paths are real.
+- Verification expectations are clear.
+
+10 points: mostly actionable.
+
+5 points: some vague instructions.
+
+0 points: vague or theoretical.
+
+## Assessment Process
+
+1. Read each instruction file completely.
+2. Cross-reference with the actual codebase.
+3. Check documented commands against package manifests, scripts, and config.
+4. Verify file and directory references.
+5. Score each criterion.
+6. Calculate total and assign grade.
+7. List specific issues.
+8. Propose concrete, concise improvements.
+
+## Red Flags
+
+- Commands that would fail.
+- References to deleted files or folders.
+- Outdated tech versions.
+- Placeholder template content.
+- Generic advice not specific to the project.
+- Duplicate or contradictory guidance across nested instruction files.
+- An `AGENTS.override.md` that accidentally hides a sibling `AGENTS.md`.