gh-lyndonkl-claude/skills/abstraction-concrete-examples/resources/evaluators/rubric_abstraction_concrete_examples.json

{
  "name": "Abstraction Ladder Quality Rubric",
  "scale": {
    "min": 1,
    "max": 5,
    "description": "1=Poor, 2=Fair, 3=Good, 4=Very Good, 5=Excellent"
  },
  "criteria": [
    {
      "name": "Level Distinctness",
      "description": "Each level is clearly distinct from adjacent levels with no redundancy",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "Levels are redundant or indistinguishable",
        "2": "Some levels overlap significantly",
        "3": "Levels are mostly distinct with minor overlap",
        "4": "All levels are clearly distinct",
        "5": "Each level adds unique, valuable perspective"
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "Transition Clarity",
      "description": "Connections between levels are logical and traceable",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "No clear connection between levels",
        "2": "Some connections are unclear or missing",
        "3": "Most transitions are logical",
        "4": "All transitions are clear and logical",
        "5": "Transitions reveal deep insights about the topic"
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "Abstraction Range",
      "description": "Spans from truly universal principles to concrete specifics",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "Limited range; all levels at similar abstraction",
        "2": "Some variation but doesn't reach extremes",
        "3": "Good range from abstract to concrete",
        "4": "Excellent range; top is universal, bottom is specific",
        "5": "Exceptional range with measurable concrete details and broadly applicable principles"
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "Concreteness at Bottom",
      "description": "Most concrete level has specific, measurable, verifiable details",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "Bottom level still abstract or vague",
        "2": "Bottom level somewhat specific but lacks detail",
        "3": "Bottom level has concrete examples",
        "4": "Bottom level has specific, measurable details",
        "5": "Bottom level includes exact values, measurements, edge cases"
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "Abstraction at Top",
      "description": "Most abstract level is universally applicable beyond this context",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "Top level is context-specific",
        "2": "Top level is somewhat general but domain-limited",
        "3": "Top level is broadly applicable",
        "4": "Top level is universal within domain",
        "5": "Top level transcends domain; applies to many fields"
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "Edge Case Quality",
      "description": "Edge cases meaningfully test boundaries and reveal insights",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "No edge cases or trivial examples",
        "2": "Edge cases present but don't challenge principles",
        "3": "Edge cases test some boundaries",
        "4": "Edge cases reveal interesting tensions or limits",
        "5": "Edge cases expose deep insights and prompt refinement"
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "Assumption Transparency",
      "description": "Assumptions, context, and limitations are stated explicitly",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "No acknowledgment of assumptions or limits",
        "2": "Few assumptions mentioned",
        "3": "Key assumptions stated",
        "4": "Comprehensive assumption documentation",
        "5": "Assumptions stated with analysis of how changes would affect ladder"
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "Coherence",
      "description": "All levels address the same aspect/thread of the topic",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "Levels address completely different topics",
        "2": "Significant topic drift between levels",
        "3": "Mostly coherent with minor drift",
        "4": "Strong coherence throughout",
        "5": "Perfect thematic unity; tells a clear story"
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "Utility",
      "description": "Ladder serves its stated purpose and provides actionable value",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "Purpose unclear; no practical value",
        "2": "Some value but doesn't clearly serve a purpose",
        "3": "Useful for stated purpose",
        "4": "Highly useful with clear applications",
        "5": "Exceptional utility; enables decisions or insights not otherwise possible"
      }
    },
    {
      "name": "Comprehensibility",
      "description": "Someone unfamiliar with the topic can follow the logic",
      "scoring": {
        "1": "Requires deep expertise to understand",
        "2": "Accessible only to domain experts",
        "3": "Understandable with some background",
        "4": "Clear to most readers",
        "5": "Crystal clear; excellent pedagogical tool"
      }
    }
  ],
  "overall_assessment": {
    "thresholds": {
      "excellent": "Average score ≥ 4.5 across all criteria",
      "very_good": "Average score ≥ 4.0 across all criteria",
      "good": "Average score ≥ 3.5 across all criteria",
      "acceptable": "Average score ≥ 3.0 across all criteria",
      "needs_improvement": "Average score < 3.0"
    }
  },
  "usage_instructions": "Rate each criterion independently on 1-5 scale. Calculate average. Identify lowest-scoring criteria for targeted improvement before delivering to user."
}