scorecard
Skill15 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Render the results of a product-eval investigation as a self-contained interactive HTML page: ranked opportunities with their Value, Confidence, verdict, evidence weight, customer quotes, and open gaps, laid out as KPI cards, a Value by Confidence quadrant, and per-opportunity cards. Use when the user wants to visualize, render, share, or make a dashboard or scorecard from an existing product-eval scope, that is, the output of prioritize-backlog or decision-readiness, or a scope's scores.md, themes.md, and decisions-log.md. Triggers include 'decision dashboard', 'product dashboard', 'scorecard from the ranked opportunities', 'turn the prioritization into something visual to share'. Do NOT use for general metrics or KPI dashboards, north-star or quarterly metric trends, grading raw signal strength, checking connected data sources, or drafting briefs; this only renders an already-scored opportunity ranking, it does not gather data or compute scores.
5 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- anthony-chaudhary/faktheir own version, first seen Nov 3, 2026
- mangollc/claude-SDR-Manager-plugintheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- lgtm-hq/ai-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- link7373/agentic-bi-teamtheir own version, first seen Sep 23, 2026
- tansuasici/claude-research-kittheir own version, first seen Jun 2, 2026
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- anthony-chaudhary/fak★ 47same name
- link7373/agentic-bi-team★ 4same name
- tansuasici/claude-research-kit★ 4same name
- lgtm-hq/ai-skills★ 1same name
- mangollc/claude-SDR-Manager-plugin★ 1same name
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 repository13 other files it gives its agents.
- calibrateSkill
- critiqueSkill
- decision-readinessSkill
- design-testSkill
- discover-sourcesSkill
- drift-checkSkill
- gather-evidenceSkill
- pressure-testSkill
- prioritize-backlogSkill
- startSkill
- synthesizeSkill
- to-build-briefSkill
- write-briefSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 12
After prioritize-backlog (ideally with decision-readiness run on the top items).
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Scorecard
Turn an investigation's scores and verdicts into a single self-contained, interactive HTML page a PM can open, sort, share, and act on. This is the rich output: it makes prioritize-backlog and decision-readiness results tangible instead of a wall of text.
When to run
After prioritize-backlog (ideally with decision-readiness run on the top items). Reads .product-eval/<scope>/scores.md, .product-eval/<scope>/themes.md, and .product-eval/<scope>/decisions-log.md.
Preflight (data contract). Before rendering, run the conformance preflight in DATA-CONTRACT.md (Validation) on scores.md, themes.md, and decisions-log.md. If a check fails (a verdict outside the four-verdict vocabulary, a band that disagrees with its number, a problem with no matching theme), stop and report it rather than drawing a misleading dashboard. examples/activation-q3/ is a conformant fixture and examples/activation-q3/scorecard.html is its rendered output.
What it produces
One standalone .product-eval/<scope>/scorecard.html (no server; only optional Chart.js from a CDN), containing:
- KPI cards: total opportunities, counts by recommendation (Decide now / Run a research sprint / Do not commit yet / Deprioritize), and the confidence ceiling.
- Value × Confidence quadrant: each opportunity plotted; a vertical line at the Confidence gate (70) and a horizontal at Value 70, so the eye lands on the top-right "Decide now" quadrant.
- Opportunity cards: one per opportunity, with clearly-labeled bands (Value, Confidence), optional 0-100 audit bars, evidence weight, accounts affected, the recommendation, verbatim customer quotes (the qualitative voice), the top complaint and the explicit ask, and a "why it ranks here" line tying the score back to that customer pain, plus the open gaps. The quotes and the complaint/ask are what make the prioritization legible; lead with them, not the number.
- A "how to read" glossary: plain-language definitions of Value, Confidence, evidence weight, and accounts, and the recommendation tiers.
- Honest footer: the confidence ceiling and the single cheapest move to raise the top item (e.g. "add one independent source type").
How to build
Generate one HTML file with inline CSS + JS. Read the data from the scope files (or accept inline data when rendering an example). For each opportunity, pull 1-2 verbatim customer quotes plus its top complaint and explicit ask from the evidence, these carry the qualitative voice and make the ranking legible. Show clearly-labeled Value and Confidence bands first, with exact 0-100 bars only as audit detail, and include the glossary. Color-code recommendations consistently: Decide now = green, Run a research sprint = amber, Do not commit yet = grey, Deprioritize = red. If a bounded ±10 adjustment was applied, note it. Keep it faithful to the formula, never invent a number the evidence doesn't support. Write to .product-eval/<scope>/scorecard.html and offer to open it.
Output
The path to the HTML scorecard plus a one-line summary (e.g. "5 opportunities, 1 Decide now, 2 Run a research sprint, 1 Do not commit yet, 1 Deprioritize; ceiling: Decide-now reachable"). End with Next move: and recommend deciding on the top item, designing the research sprint for under-evidenced items, or writing the stakeholder report.
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.