store-evaluation git:20260529.0565655A

Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/28b85a68a485c030.

---
name: store-evaluation
description: "Evaluate a proposed store for inclusion in Alex_ACT_Plugin_Mall using a quality scorecard"
lastReviewed: 2026-05-05
---

# Store Evaluation

Score a proposed source store against five dimensions. Stores below the threshold are rejected. Stores above are added to `sources/supported-stores.json` via [source-inventory](../source-inventory/SKILL.md).

## When to Use

- A user invokes `/add-source` with a candidate store
- Periodic re-evaluation of borderline entries (every 6 months)

## The Five Dimensions

Score 0–2 per dimension. Maximum score is 10. **Threshold for inclusion: ≥ 7**.

### 1. Maintenance Health (0–2)

| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | Repo archived, no commits in 12+ months, last release > 2 years old |
| 1 | Active but low velocity — commits in last 6 months, no recent release |
| 2 | Active maintenance — commits in last 90 days OR active issue triage OR recent release |

### 2. Adoption Signal (0–2)

| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | Solo project, < 50 stars, no external contributors |
| 1 | Some adoption — 50–500 stars, occasional external contributors |
| 2 | Real adoption — > 500 stars OR multiple maintainers OR sustained external contribution |

(Stars are noisy; weight them with maintenance + license signal.)

### 3. License Clarity (0–2)

| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | No license, custom restrictive license, or unclear terms |
| 1 | Permissive license but with vendor-specific restrictions |
| 2 | Clean OSI-approved license (MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD, ISC, etc.) |

### 4. Catalog Fit (0–2)

| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | Off-topic — no clear use case for an AI agent that consumes plugins from this Mall |
| 1 | Tangential — useful in narrow scenarios |
| 2 | Direct fit — agents that use this Mall would install plugins from this source in normal workflows |

### 5. Documentation Quality (0–2)

| Score | Criterion |
|---|---|
| 0 | No README, broken docs, or installation steps unclear |
| 1 | Basic README, install instructions present, examples sparse |
| 2 | Quality README + examples + clear installation + troubleshooting |

## Decision

| Total score | Verdict |
|---|---|
| 9–10 | **Strong accept** — add to the registry |
| 7–8 | **Accept** — add with a note of any caveats |
| 5–6 | **Defer** — request more signal (stars, contributors, time) and re-evaluate in 90 days |
| 0–4 | **Reject** — document the rationale in `docs/curation-log.md` |

**On accept**: add the entry to `sources/supported-stores.json` per [source-inventory](../source-inventory/SKILL.md). The Mall does NOT clone or modify the upstream repo — it scores it and surfaces it in the catalog; agents install directly from upstream at a pinned ref.

## Output Template

```markdown
# Store Evaluation — <store name>

**URL**: <repo URL>
**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD
**Evaluator**: <name>

## Scores

| Dimension | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Maintenance Health | x/2 | ... |
| Adoption Signal | x/2 | ... |
| License Clarity | x/2 | ... |
| Catalog Fit | x/2 | ... |
| Documentation Quality | x/2 | ... |
| **Total** | **x/10** | |

## Verdict

Strong accept | Accept | Defer | Reject

## Rationale

<2-3 sentences>

## Proposed registry entry (if accepted)

```jsonc
{
  "name": "<kebab-name>",
  "remote": "https://github.com/<org>/<repo>",
  "pluginDir": "<plugins | skills | . | other>",
  "quality": "<official | community-curated | community | domain | reference>",
  "provenance": false,
  "license": "<SPDX-id or null>",
  "added_at": "YYYY-MM-DD"
}
```

## ACT Pass Trail

<markers>
```

## Anti-Patterns

| Anti-pattern | Correction |
|---|---|
| Scoring on stars alone | Stars are one signal of five; weight with maintenance and fit |
| "I like it" override | The scorecard is the contract. Document overrides as ADRs |
| Rejecting without recording | Every rejection sets precedent; document or future similar proposals will repeat the cycle |

## Falsifiability

This scorecard needs revision if any of the following occur within 90 days:

- Accepted stores (score >= 7) are repeatedly pruned for quality or maintenance failures
- Deferred stores (score 5-6) consistently pass later without new evidence, indicating scoring too strict
- Reviewers produce materially different scores for the same store with no documented rationale

Track these in `docs/curation-log.md` tagged `[STORE-SCORING]`.

## Related

- [source-inventory](../source-inventory/SKILL.md) — adding accepted stores to the registry
- [staleness-discipline](../staleness-discipline/SKILL.md) — pruning gates
- `/add-source` prompt