commonspecs

How we assess a product

Engineering over marketing. The score rewards the facts that actually differentiate good from bad in a category — and it always travels with how confident we are in each fact.

What "good" means

Every category has a handful of fields that decide whether a product is well-made and worth its price. We score those, weight the rest by whether the data is even present, and roll it into a single 0–100 quality score per product. The judgement that matters to a buyer is fitness for purpose and cost of use over time, not the sticker price. A few examples of the kind of thing that counts:

Confidence, not vibes

Every value is backed by evidence and corroboration across independent sources, and surfaced in a band:

When independent sources disagree, both values stay visible — a disagreement is a buying signal, not noise to smooth over. A value seen by only one independent source is flagged as needing corroboration. Confidence comes from verifiable facts, not from any one author's say-so.

What we don't publish

We publish the qualitative method — which fields matter in a category and why. We do not publish the scoring formula, the per-field weights, or the thresholds. That weighting is the moat; trust is meant to come from the facts and their confidence, which you can verify, not from us exposing the algorithm. The API returns a product's total_score and which fields are missing — never the per-field breakdown.

Want your agent to use this method? Install the skill.