rc-gan

Runs an adversarial generator-evaluator loop to score and refine subjective quality of artifacts.

19|1|Updated Jun 27, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/rodolfochicone/rc-project --skill rc-gan-rodolfochicone
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: rc-gan
Source: https://github.com/rodolfochicone/rc-project/tree/main/skills/misc/rc-gan
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/rodolfochicone/rc-project --skill rc-gan-rodolfochicone

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Correctness gates like make verify prove code works but say nothing about whether a UI is well-designed, a CLI is pleasant, or copy lands. This Skill closes that gap by iterating on subjective quality with measurable scores instead of vibes. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Adversarial loop: A generator builds or improves the artifact while a fresh, independent evaluator exercises the running result and scores it against a weighted rubric, so nothing grades its own work. - Weighted rubric with stop conditions: Define 3-5 weighted dimensions in Phase 0, then iterate until the score clears a threshold (default 7.0), plateaus (< 0.3 improvement for 2 rounds), or hits the iteration cap (default 8). - Use Case: Refine a new CLI's ergonomics by having the evaluator actually run commands, flag concrete defects like "--help doesn't list the sync subcommand", and iterate until the weighted score passes 7.0. ## Quick Start Ask the agent to run the GAN loop on your target, for example: refine the settings screen UI with a threshold of 7.5 and a maximum of 6 iterations.

Frequently Asked Questions about rc-gan

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I improve UI quality with an AI feedback loop?▼

Define a weighted rubric (e.g. design 0.3, craft 0.3, functionality 0.2, originality 0.2), then run a generator-evaluator loop where a fresh evaluator exercises the running UI in a browser and scores each dimension 1-10. Iterate on the concrete defects until the weighted score clears your threshold.

How to evaluate CLI ergonomics automatically?▼

Have an independent evaluator actually run the commands and score dimensions like ergonomics, clarity, correctness, and discoverability against a weighted rubric. It reports specific addressable defects such as missing subcommands in --help output rather than vague impressions.

When should I use a quality loop instead of code review?▼

Use this loop for subjective quality like design, UX, and copy that a pass/fail gate cannot capture. Use code review for correctness and security defects; the two are complementary and this skill explicitly does not handle bugs or vulnerabilities.

What are the limitations of rubric-based quality scoring?▼

Scores depend on the rubric fixed in Phase 0, so a poorly chosen rubric produces misleading results. The loop also stops on plateaus or iteration caps, meaning it may report a best-effort version with remaining gaps rather than a passing score.

Why must the evaluator be a fresh context each iteration?▼

Reusing the generator's reasoning lets it anchor on previous verdicts and grade its own work. A fresh, independent evaluator each round keeps scoring honest and produces unbiased, concrete defect feedback.