assessment-scoring
This skill should be used when the user asks to "score a codebase", "rate code quality", "generate assessment score", "calculate weighted score", "final assessment", or when any code-auditor agent nee
Files3
View on GitHubSKILL.mdplugins/code-auditor/skills/assessment-scoring/SKILL.md
GitHubAssessment Scoring Methodology
Purpose
Provide a standardized, weighted scoring system for evaluating codebases across five dimensions: Code Quality, Performance, Security, Maintainability, and Testing.
Scoring Categories
| Category | Weight | Focus Areas |
|---|---|---|
| Code Quality | 25% | Structure, complexity, standards, error handling |
| Performance | 25% | Algorithms, rendering, async, caching |
| Security | 20% | Vulnerabilities, auth, data protection, dependencies |
| Maintainability | 20% | Organization, documentation, coupling, tech debt |
| Testing | 10% | Coverage, quality, distribution, critical paths |
Scoring Process
- Each category receives a raw score from 0 to 10
- Apply positive factors (good practices found) and negative factors (issues found)
- Multiply each raw score by its weight percentage
- Sum weighted scores for final composite score (0-10)
Score Calculation Template
| Category | Score | Weight | Calculation | Weighted Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Code Quality | X/10 | 25% | X × 0.25 | X.XX |
| Performance | X/10 | 25% | X × 0.25 | X.XX |
| Security | X/10 | 20% | X × 0.20 | X.XX |
| Maintainability | X/10 | 20% | X × 0.20 | X.XX |
| Testing | X/10 | 10% | X × 0.10 | X.XX |
| Total | 100% | X.XX/10 |
Score Interpretation
| Range | Rating | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 0–2 | Critical | Immediate intervention required |
| 2–4 | Poor | Significant issues affecting development |
| 4–6 | Fair | Notable issues but manageable |
| 6–8 | Good | Minor issues, well-maintained |
| 8–10 | Excellent | Industry best practices |
Remediation Roadmap Template
Immediate Actions (Critical/Blocker)
- Fix all critical security vulnerabilities
- Address memory leaks and resource management issues
- Resolve blocking performance bottlenecks
Short-term (1-4 weeks)
- Reduce code duplication below 5%
- Increase test coverage to 60%
- Refactor high-complexity methods
Long-term (1-3 months)
- Achieve 80% test coverage
- Reduce technical debt to manageable levels
- Implement missing architectural patterns
Additional Resources
Reference Files
For detailed scoring criteria per category, consult:
references/scoring-rubrics.md: Detailed positive/negative scoring factors per categoryreferences/interpretation-guide.md: In-depth interpretation guidance and recommendation templates