# Harness Health Scoring Rubric

Use this when asked to audit or score a repository's harness quality.

## Dimensions

### 1. Project map clarity
- strong: key directories and entrypoints are documented and current
- partial: some structure is documented but stale or incomplete
- weak: little or no useful repo map exists

### 2. Validation commands
- strong: build, test, lint, and typecheck are clear and runnable
- partial: some commands exist but are incomplete or ambiguous
- weak: commands are missing, stale, or unverified

### 3. Fast feedback
- strong: targeted checks or quick tests exist
- partial: only slower validation exists
- weak: no obvious quick validation path

### 4. Task templates
- strong: reusable templates exist for common work types
- partial: ad hoc instructions exist but are inconsistent
- weak: every task must be reinvented

### 5. Guardrails
- strong: high-risk areas and forbidden changes are explicit
- partial: some constraints exist but are vague
- weak: almost no constraints are documented

### 6. Doc-code alignment
- strong: harness docs match the current repo layout and commands
- partial: mixed accuracy
- weak: obviously stale or misleading

## Output format

Keep the score compact. Example:

- project map clarity: partial
- validation commands: strong
- fast feedback: weak
- task templates: weak
- guardrails: partial
- doc-code alignment: partial

Top priorities:
1. Add a fast unit test or package-scoped validation command
2. Refresh AGENTS.md directory map
3. Document forbidden change areas