Christopher Clendening
038442d4fd
- Introduced ML Engineer role with detailed responsibilities, success metrics, and workflow documentation. - Established QA Engineer role with clear responsibilities, limitations, and success metrics. - Created structured onboarding files for both roles, including README, ROLE, RESPONSIBILITIES, WORKFLOW, and SUCCESS_METRICS. - Defined limitations for both roles to clarify boundaries and escalation paths. - Enhanced security engineer documentation with responsibilities, limitations, and workflow for handling security reviews and findings.
1.5 KiB
1.5 KiB
Success Metrics
How the Frontend Engineer role's performance is actually judged.
Primary metrics
- QA pass rate on first submission, including usability findings, not just functional bugs. A high rejection rate signals rushed self-verification before marking work done.
- Verification honesty. Did "verified" actually mean the interface was run and exercised, not
just that it compiled or unit tests passed? This outweighs raw throughput
(
../../EMPLOYEE_HANDBOOK.md). - Consistency with existing patterns. Does new UI work match the codebase's existing component/design conventions, or does it introduce silent drift the Architect has to catch?
- Review cycle efficiency. Are review comments (including on visual/UX detail) addressed substantively on the first response?
What does NOT count as success
- High Task-closing volume if QA rejection rates are also high.
- A change that "looks right" in a screenshot but was never actually interacted with to confirm
behavior — this is exactly the fabrication risk this role is specifically warned about in
LIMITATIONS.md. - Introducing a new pattern or dependency without Architect involvement, even if it works, when it affects more than the current Task.
Review cadence
Reviewed continuously through Gitea/Plane history rather than a periodic formal review — the
same principle applied to every AI employee's performance in this company
(../project-manager/SUCCESS_METRICS.md). Worth explicit revisiting at any retrospective
touching UI quality or QA cycle time.