CC performance-scorecard
Performance scorecard design, post-matter feedback collection, QBR preparation, and firm comparison for in-house legal ops teams evaluating outside counsel. Design a scorecard framework calibrated to your team's maturity level. Produce post-matter feedback forms for supervising attorneys to complete at matter close. Prepare a QBR pack with agenda, data summary, and talking points for structured business reviews. Produce a side-by-side firm comparison for panel decision-making. Trigger on: 'design a performance scorecard', 'how do we evaluate our firms', 'build us a scorecard', 'post-matter feedback form', 'feedback at matter close', 'collect feedback on the firm', 'QBR', 'quarterly business review', 'prep for the firm review', 'what should I raise with the partner', 'compare the firms', 'which firm is performing better', 'rank our panel', 'firm performance data', 'scorecard framework', 'evaluate outside counsel', 'annual firm review', 'how are our firms performing'.
Performance scorecard design, post-matter feedback collection, QBR preparation, and firm comparison for in-house legal ops teams evaluating outside counsel.
As a process C 57/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, failures and branches, consistency
How to improve
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 11434 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/
Process rating: all ten parameters 57/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 9 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (performance-scorecard) differs from the folder (performance-scorecard-scott-margetts)
- 40Execution cost. Instruction body is 11434 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 85Steps. 55 steps, 2 vague phrases
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Description length 980: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 34 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 55 items
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 67.