Verdict Score And Rank

---
name: verdict-score-and-rank
description: "**Mode skill.** Default-enabled on the Verdict specialist."
metadata:
  author: wayland
  version: "1.0.0"
  category: "verdict"
---

# score-and-rank

**Mode skill.** Default-enabled on the Verdict specialist.

## When to use

Use any time a draft is asked for a ship-decision. That covers a finished post, email, sales page, course module, video script, or internal artifact from a teammate (role file, mode skill, dossier). If the question is *"is this ready?"*, run the rubric. If the question is *"how do I make it better?"*, run `flag-and-fix` and `the-one-edit` after.

## The eight dimensions

Score each 1–10. Whole numbers only. A 7 is "ships, but the next reader will notice the gap." An 8 is "ships, no apology." A 9 is "the audience forwards it." A 10 is reserved for work that resets the category — give it once a quarter at most.

1. **Hook strength.** Does the first line earn the second? Read line one alone. 1 = scroll-past. 5 = competent. 8 = the reader cannot leave. The hook is the gate; if it fails, the rest barely matters.
2. **Clarity.** Could a smart outsider read this once and explain it back? Count the sentences the eye stumbles over. Each stumble drops a point. 8+ = clean on first pass.
3. **Emotional pull.** Does the reader feel something specific by paragraph two — recognition, frustration, hope, curiosity? Generic interest is a 4. Named emotion tied to the reader's life is an 8.
4. **Differentiation.** Could a competitor have written this same line? If yes, you are at 5 or below. The angle, the through-line only this author could write — that is the score.
5. **Value density.** Words-to-payoff ratio. How many sentences do real work, how many are runway? A 9 reads short even when long. A 4 reads long even when short.
6. **Voice match.** Does it sound like the brand or author the audience expects? Pull two random lines, read them against Brand's section in `TEAM_MEMORY.md`. Drift drops the score fast.
7. **Shareability.** Would a real reader send this to one specific other person — and can you name the person and the reason? If you cannot name both, the score is 5 or below.
8. **Platform fit.** Does it fit the distribution surface? A 1,200-word essay posted as a tweet is a 2 on fit, even at a 9 on content. Length, format, opening conventions, media affordances — all here.

## Procedure

Two reads. Discipline matters.

1. **First read — reader's seat.** Read the piece straight through as the audience would, on the device they would use. Do not take notes. Notice where you stalled, where you re-read, where you reached for the close button.
2. **Second read — rubric pass.** Go dimension by dimension. Score each 1–10. Write the score with one phrase of justification. Do not score by gut average; score each dimension on its own merits.
3. **Identify the binding constraints.** The two lowest scores name what is actually holding the piece back. Everything else is grace notes. Write them at the top of the verdict block.
4. **Ship-or-return decision.** Ship-ready threshold: no score below 6, average at 7.5 or higher. Below either, return.

## Decision rules

- Score dimensions independently. A great hook does not lift clarity. A clean voice does not lift differentiation. Mash them and the rubric becomes a vibe.
- The threshold is the threshold. A piece averaging 7.4 with a 5 in clarity does not ship because the rest is strong — clarity is binding.
- One score, not a range. "7 or 8" is hedging. Pick.
- If you cannot score a dimension because a brief input is missing (audience, surface, brand voice doc), name the missing input rather than guessing. Verdict on incomplete brief is malpractice.

## Anti-patterns

- Scoring on tone instead of on the rubric. "I liked it" is not a 9. Liking it is a separate question from whether the eight dimensions land.
- Averaging away a critical failure. A 9 hook with a 3 platform fit is a return, not an 8 piece.
- Scoring the topic instead of the execution. The idea may be brilliant and the words may still fail.

## Before / after

**Brief:** Score a LinkedIn post for a founder coach, audience product-aware, 220 words.

**Before** (vibe verdict): *"Strong post. Solid hook, decent body, CTA is clear. Ship it."*

**After** (rubric verdict):

> Hook 8 — specific identity line lands.
> Clarity 7 — one stalled sentence in paragraph two.
> Emotional pull 6 — recognition but no heat.
> Differentiation 5 — line three reads category-generic.
> Value density 7.
> Voice match 8.
> Shareability 5 — no one specific would forward this.
> Platform fit 8.
> Binding: differentiation, shareability. Average 6.75 — return.