speckit-evaluator-report
Skill3 starsChanged 27 days agoMITView on GitHub
Render evaluator results as a human-readable report, CI annotation, or
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- electrohire/spec-kit-aeeword for word, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- electrohire/spec-kit-aee★ 4100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository24 other files it gives its agents.
- speckit-aee-assessSkill
- speckit-aee-challengeSkill
- speckit-aee-draft-claimsSkill
- speckit-aee-gapsSkill
- speckit-aee-gateSkill
- speckit-aee-report-savingsSkill
- speckit-aee-reviewSkill
- speckit-aee-route-evidenceSkill
- speckit-aee-traceSkill
- speckit-aee-verifySkill
- speckit-analyzeSkill
- speckit-checklistSkill
- speckit-clarifySkill
- speckit-constitutionSkill
- speckit-convergeSkill
- speckit-evaluator-composeSkill
- speckit-evaluator-routeSkill
- speckit-evaluator-runSkill
- speckit-implementSkill
- speckit-planSkill
- speckit-specifySkill
- speckit-tasksSkill
- speckit-taskstoissuesSkill
- evaluator-contractSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 41
Read the specified result files (or discover them).
- Distinctive: line 124
Never modify result files — report reads them only.
- Distinctive: line 125
Never fabricate or summarize away findings — the report reflects exactly what the evaluators produced.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Evaluator Report Skill
Evaluator Report
Render evaluator results (individual or composed) into a human-readable report, CI annotation, or release gate decision.
This command consumes evaluator result JSON files and produces output suitable for different consumers: developers reading in-terminal, CI systems parsing annotations, or release pipelines checking gates.
User Input
$ARGUMENTSThe user input specifies what to report and how. Accept:
- Result files — one or more evaluator result file paths, or a composed result path. If not provided, discover the latest composed result for the current phase, or the latest individual results.
- Format —
terminal(default),markdown,json,ci-annotation, orgate. See Output Formats below. - Phase — filter results to a specific phase.
- Severity threshold — only show findings at or above this severity (
critical,high,medium,low,info). Default:low.
Prerequisites
- Path safety (do this before any read or write): resolve the project root and the real, symlink-resolved path of
.specify/extensions/evaluator/results/and every result file you touch. Refuse and report — never follow — if any path component is a symlink, or if the resolved path does not remain inside the project root. - At least one result file MUST exist. If none exist, report "No evaluator results found" and exit.
Execution
1. Load Results
Read the specified result files (or discover them). Each must be valid JSON conforming to the evaluator result schema.
2. Filter Findings
Apply the severity threshold. Findings below the threshold are excluded from the report but counted in the summary.
3. Render in Requested Format
terminal (default)
A color-coded terminal report:
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
EVALUATOR REPORT — after_plan
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Outcome: ITERATE
Evaluators: 2 run, 1 passed, 1 requests iteration
Findings: 3 total (0 critical, 2 high, 1 medium)
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
[HIGH] EPI-001 — unsupported_claim
Subject: REQ-014
Evidence: none (unsupported)
Recommendation: gather_evidence
Rationale: Claim presented as fact without supporting evidence.
[HIGH] EPI-002 — contradiction
Subject: REQ-007
Evidence: spec.md#REQ-007 (observed), constitution.md (observed)
Recommendation: clarify
Rationale: Requirement conflicts with constitution article IV.
[MEDIUM] EPI-003 — ambiguous_requirement
Subject: REQ-022
Recommendation: clarify
Rationale: Requirement uses undefined term "scalable".
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Next Action: iterate → plan
"2 of 2 evaluators completed. 1 requests iteration."
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════markdown
A Markdown document written to .specify/extensions/evaluator/reports/report-<phase>-<timestamp>.md. Suitable for PR comments, issue bodies, or documentation.
json
The raw JSON result(s) printed to stdout. Suitable for piping to other tools.
ci-annotation
GitHub Actions workflow commands (::warning::, ::error::) or GitLab CI annotations emitted to stdout. Format:
::error file=spec.md,line=14,title=EPI-001::[unsupported_claim] Claim presented as fact without supporting evidence
::warning file=plan.md,line=42,title=EPI-003::[ambiguous_requirement] Requirement uses undefined term "scalable"Findings with severity critical or high use ::error::; medium and below use ::warning::.
gate
A release-gate decision. Exit code 0 if the composed outcome is pass or warn; exit code 1 for iterate, clarify, or gather_evidence; exit code 2 for block. Prints the outcome and summary to stdout.
4. Write Report (markdown format only)
For markdown format, write the report to .specify/extensions/evaluator/reports/report-<phase>-<timestamp>.md.
Output Formats Summary
| Format | Output | Use Case |
terminal | Color-coded stdout | Developer review in terminal |
markdown | File + stdout path | PR comments, documentation |
json | Raw JSON stdout | Piping to other tools |
ci-annotation | Workflow commands stdout | CI/CD pipeline annotations |
gate | Exit code + stdout | Release gates, pre-commit hooks |
Guardrails
- Never modify result files — report reads them only.
- Never fabricate or summarize away findings — the report reflects exactly what the evaluators produced.
- For
ci-annotationformat, ensure file paths and line numbers are accurate — do not guess. - For
gateformat, the exit code MUST be deterministic given the same input results. - Reports are written under
.specify/extensions/evaluator/reports/— never outside this directory.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

