Clawrank

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".

JoeyCacciatore3@joeycacciatore3

Install

openclaw skills install @joeycacciatore3/nate-clawrank

🦞 ClawRank — 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.
🦀	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.
🪸	50-59	Barnacle	Frequent corrections. Repeated mistakes.
🧊	<50	Frozen	Fundamental reliability problems.

7 Dimensions (0-10 each → sum = score out of 70 → 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 — 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

text

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

Format

markdown

## 🦞 ClawRank: XX/100 — [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: