OpenSkillIndex← back to search
claude-code

NWave nw-quality-validation

Type-specific validation checklists, six quality characteristics, and quality gate thresholds for documentation assessment

install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/nWave-ai/nWave
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/nWave-ai/nWave "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/nWave/skills/nw-quality-validation" ~/.claude/skills/nwave-ai-nwave-nw-quality-validation && rm -rf "$T"
manifest: nWave/skills/nw-quality-validation/SKILL.md
source content

Quality Validation

Six Quality Characteristics

  • Accuracy: Factually correct, technically sound, current | Validation: expert review, automated testing
  • Completeness: All necessary info present for doc type | Validation: checklist, gap analysis
  • Clarity: Easy to understand, logical flow, appropriate level | Validation: Flesch 70-80
  • Consistency: Uniform terminology, formatting, structure | Validation: style guide compliance
  • Correctness: Proper grammar, spelling, punctuation | Validation: automated check, zero errors
  • Usability: User achieves goal efficiently | Validation: task success, DIVIO type purpose served

Quality Gate Thresholds

MetricThreshold
Readability (Flesch)70-80
Spelling errors0
Broken links0
Style compliance95%+
Type purity80%+ single type

Type-Specific Validation Checklists

Tutorial Checklist

  • Completable without external references | [ ] Steps numbered and sequential
  • Each step has verifiable outcome | [ ] No assumed prior knowledge | [ ] Builds confidence

How-to Checklist

  • Clear goal stated upfront | [ ] Assumes fundamentals known
  • Single task focus | [ ] Ends with completion indicator | [ ] No basics teaching

Reference Checklist

  • All parameters documented | [ ] Return values specified
  • Error conditions listed | [ ] Examples per entry | [ ] No narrative

Explanation Checklist

  • Addresses "why" not "what" | [ ] Provides context and reasoning
  • Discusses alternatives | [ ] No task steps | [ ] Builds conceptual model

Verdict Criteria

  • approved: Passes all type-specific validation, no collapse violations, meets quality gates
  • needs-revision: Minor issues fixable in place (clarity, missing examples, small gaps)
  • restructure-required: Collapse detected requiring split, or fundamental type mismatch