How do I install the Assessment Scoring skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add sigistry/assessment-scoring in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Assessment Scoring safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Assessment Scoring?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Assessment Scoring free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Assessment Scoring?

sigistry (@sigistry) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Assessment Scoring by sigistry — Agent Skill

Name: Assessment Scoring
Author: sigistry

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 needs to produce a scoring summary. Provides the standardized scoring methodology for code assessment reports.

sigistry 3a46a90 3 files · 12.6 KB Updated Sep 17, 2026

File contents

Assessment 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 category
references/interpretation-guide.md: In-depth interpretation guidance and recommendation templates

---name: assessment-scoringdescription: 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 needs to produce a scoring summary. Provides the standardized scoring methodology for code assessment reports.---# Assessment Scoring Methodology## PurposeProvide 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 Process1. Each category receives a raw score from 0 to 102. Apply positive factors (good practices found) and negative factors (issues found)3. Multiply each raw score by its weight percentage4. 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 FilesFor detailed scoring criteria per category, consult:- **`references/scoring-rubrics.md`**: Detailed positive/negative scoring factors per category- **`references/interpretation-guide.md`**: In-depth interpretation guidance and recommendation templates

Frequently asked questions