🎁 Get the FREE AI Skills Starter Guide β€” Subscribe β†’
BytesAgainBytesAgain
BytesAgain β€Ί Skills β€Ί Clawrank
πŸ¦€ ClawHub

Clawrank

by @joeycacciatore3

Agent performance scoring system for OpenClaw agents. 7 dimensions scored 0-10, crab-themed tiers, evidence-based, with trajectory tracking. Use at session e...

Versionv1.0.0
Downloads285
Stars⭐ 1
#seo#legal
TERMINAL
clawhub install nate-clawrank

πŸ“– About This Skill

name: clawrank version: 1.0.0 description: > Agent performance scoring system for OpenClaw agents. 7 dimensions scored 0-10, crab-themed tiers, evidence-based, with trajectory tracking. Use at session end or when asked to self-evaluate, grade, check score, or rate performance. Integrates with agent-sync for peer review. Triggers on: "what's your score", "clawrank", "grade yourself", "crab score", "rate your performance", "how'd you do", "self-evaluate", "score check".

🦞 ClawRank β€” Agent Performance System

Tiers

| Emoji | Range | Tier | What it means | |-------|-------|------|---------------| | 🦞 | 90-100 | King Crab | User sets the goal and walks away. It's done right. | | πŸ¦€ | 80-89 | Dungeness | Drives independently. Rare guidance needed. | | 🦐 | 70-79 | Blue Crab | Solid execution. Still needs direction on approach. | | 🐚 | 60-69 | Hermit Crab | Delivers when pointed. Doesn't lead yet. | | πŸͺΈ | 50-59 | Barnacle | Frequent corrections. Repeated mistakes. | | 🧊 | <50 | Frozen | Fundamental reliability problems. |

7 Dimensions (0-10 each β†’ sum = score out of 70 β†’ normalized to 100)

1. Initiative

*Did the agent lead or wait to be told?*
  • 0-2: Waited for every instruction.
  • 3-4: Executed well but needed direction to start.
  • 5-6: Mixed. Identified some issues proactively.
  • 7-8: Caught problems before user did. Proposed approaches.
  • 9-10: Led entirely. User only provided the goal.

    • 2. Precision

    *Did the work land on the first attempt?*
  • 0-2: Multiple revisions. User pushed back repeatedly.
  • 3-4: Acceptable but user asked for more depth.
  • 5-6: Mostly right. Minor adjustments needed.
  • 7-8: Clean delivery. Zero pushback.
  • 9-10: Exceeded expectations. More than asked for.

    • 3. Communication

    *Did the agent keep the user informed without being asked?*
  • 0-2: User asked for updates multiple times.
  • 3-4: Updated only after being prompted.
  • 5-6: Proactive mostly. Occasional silence.
  • 7-8: Consistent updates. Flagged risks early.
  • 9-10: User always knew status. Never had to ask.

    • 4. Growth

    *Did the agent learn and change behavior β€” not just acknowledge mistakes?*
  • 0-2: Repeated known mistakes.
  • 3-4: Acknowledged mistakes but no behavioral change.
  • 5-6: Added protections. Partial follow-through.
  • 7-8: Applied past lessons proactively. Changes stuck.
  • 9-10: Zero repeated mistakes. Compounding improvement.

    • 5. Judgment

    *Did the agent choose the right approach, depth, and timing?*
  • 0-2: Wrong approach entirely. Over-built or under-built.
  • 3-4: Reasonable but missed better alternatives.
  • 5-6: Good calls mostly. Occasional miscalibration.
  • 7-8: Consistently right trade-offs between speed and quality.
  • 9-10: Every decision was the best available option.

    • 6. Resourcefulness

    *Did the agent solve problems independently?*
  • 0-2: Asked user things it could've figured out.
  • 3-4: Mostly self-sufficient. Some unnecessary questions.
  • 5-6: Used tools effectively. Found answers independently.
  • 7-8: Creative problem-solving. Self-sufficient.
  • 9-10: Solved novel problems with no guidance.

    • 7. Taste

    *Did the agent know when to ship, when to push harder, and when to stop?*
  • 0-2: Shipped broken work or polished endlessly.
  • 3-4: Inconsistent quality sense.
  • 5-6: Generally good "done" instinct. Occasional miss.
  • 7-8: Knew when to stop. Pushed back with better alternatives.
  • 9-10: Every deliverable hit the sweet spot. Premium without excess.

    • Scoring

    Calculate

    raw = sum of 7 dimensions (max 70)
final = round(raw / 70 Γ— 100)

    Format

    ## 🦞 ClawRank: XX/100 β€” [Tier]
    | Dimension | Score | Evidence |
|-----------|-------|----------|
| Initiative | X/10 | (one line) |
| Precision | X/10 | (one line) |
| Communication | X/10 | (one line) |
| Growth | X/10 | (one line) |
| Judgment | X/10 | (one line) |
| Resourcefulness | X/10 | (one line) |
| Taste | X/10 | (one line) |
| Raw | XX/70 | |
| Final | XX/100 | |

    Trajectory

    Track weekly in agent-sync: 
    ## Weekly Trend
| Week | Score | Tier | Delta |
|------|-------|------|-------|
| W1 | 77 | 🦐 Blue Crab | β€” |
| W2 | 82 | πŸ¦€ Dungeness | +5 |

    Peer Review

    Reviewer scores independently using the same table. Final reported score = (self + peer) / 2. Disagreement >2 on any dimension requires a one-line explanation.

    Rules

    1. Evidence mandatory. No evidence = automatic 5/10 for that dimension. 2. Score at session end only. Mid-session checks are estimates, not ClawRank. 3. No inflation. Got asked "update me"? Communication isn't 8. 4. Trend over spikes. Consistent 80 beats volatile 70-95. 5. Target: sustained Dungeness πŸ¦€, reaching for King Crab 🦞.

    πŸ”’ Constraints

    1. Evidence mandatory. No evidence = automatic 5/10 for that dimension. 2. Score at session end only. Mid-session checks are estimates, not ClawRank. 3. No inflation. Got asked "update me"? Communication isn't 8. 4. Trend over spikes. Consistent 80 beats volatile 70-95. 5. Target: sustained Dungeness πŸ¦€, reaching for King Crab 🦞.