Create custom Tessl reviewer plugins – fork the default rubric, build one from scratch, or derive its rubrics from evidence (existing skills, PR review feedback, agent logs). Scaffolds the plugin directory structure, authors rubrics and config.json, and validates the result with tessl review run.
97
96%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
98%
1.15xAverage score across 6 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
From-scratch security reviewer plugin creation
plugin.json name field
100%
100%
plugin.json version field
100%
100%
plugin.json description field
100%
100%
plugin.json private field
0%
100%
plugin.json skills field
0%
100%
Three schema files present
44%
100%
Rubric evaluation_target
100%
100%
Rubric scale
100%
100%
Rubric reference_examples
100%
100%
Dimension weights sum
100%
100%
Dimension required fields
100%
100%
config.json judge key matches rubric stem
100%
100%
config.json weight invariant
100%
100%
validation_weight is 0.0
100%
100%
SKILL.md present
60%
100%
Fork default rubric and add domain-specific judge
Fork approach used
100%
100%
New judge file exists
100%
100%
Judge key matches filename
100%
100%
All three judges registered
100%
100%
Plugin-level weight invariant
100%
100%
New judge weight ~30%
100%
100%
Rubric dimension weights
100%
100%
New rubric required fields
100%
100%
Standard scale used
100%
100%
Dimension id snake_case
100%
100%
plugin.json present
0%
100%
Correct directory scaffold
0%
100%
Fix broken reviewer plugin config
Config weights sum to 1.0
0%
100%
Judge key matches rubric filename
100%
100%
Rubric dimension weights sum to 1.0
100%
100%
Config weight error documented
50%
100%
Key mismatch error documented
100%
100%
Dimension weight error documented
100%
100%
fix-log.md corrections described
80%
100%
Three-judge API docs reviewer plugin from scratch
Three rubric files
0%
100%
Config judge key match
0%
100%
Weight invariant
0%
100%
Small validation weight
0%
100%
plugin.json name field
0%
100%
plugin.json version
0%
100%
plugin.json private
0%
100%
plugin.json skills path
0%
100%
Schemas copied
0%
100%
Standard scale
0%
100%
Dimension id snake_case
0%
100%
Rubric dimension weights sum
100%
100%
Required rubric fields
0%
100%
Dimension score entries
0%
100%
Derive a review-plugin rubric from gathered evidence (agent logs present)
Produces a design file only
100%
100%
Trigger-clarity dimension on description
0%
100%
Trigger-clarity anchored in the real failed description
0%
100%
Enforceability dimension on content
83%
100%
Content judge carries scope and scoring_notes
100%
100%
Dimension for the recurring api:sync feedback
100%
100%
api:sync anchors drawn from the PR evidence
100%
100%
Verifier-type finding routed out of the rubric
0%
100%
Dimension weights sum to 1.0 per rubric
100%
100%
Plugin-level weight split sums to 1.0
50%
100%
Weights reflect frequency and severity
100%
100%
Derive rubrics from evidence, cloud sandbox (no agent logs)
Acknowledges no log evidence
100%
100%
No fabricated log-based activation evidence
100%
100%
Judges with evaluation_target
100%
100%
Verifier classification present
100%
100%
Dimension vs verifier reasoning
100%
100%
Anchors from actual feedback
100%
100%
Frequency/severity drives weights
100%
100%
Weights sum to 1.0 per judge
100%
100%
Handoff note to create-review-plugin
100%
100%
No scaffolding actions taken
100%
0%