Research task (Creative Writing):
Write about the politics of the Mahabharat and what led up to the Kurukshetra war for an audience that knows the basics. Talk less about the religious aspect and more about the politics and the dichotomy between the Pandavas and Kauravas, and how it led to the final war as well as how those factors affected decisions during the war. Consider every player involved, not just the Pandavas and Kauravas. 

Evaluation rubric:
criterion: The response describes the roles, political motivations, and wartime alignments of secondary kingdoms, noting which were Kaurava-aligned vs. Pandava-aligned as well as any neutrals/splits and how these ties shaped key events (e.g. Gandhara, Dvaraka/Yadava factions, Madra, Panchala, Matsya, Sindhu, Trigarta, Kamboja, Avanti, Pragjyotisa, Kekaya)
weight: 4
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The response describes the political motives, obligations, and personal calculations that led key figures to their alignments and wartime roles and flags any shifts, coercion, or split loyalties (e.g. Drupada, Salya, Jayadratha, Bhishma, Drona, Karna, Krishna/Balarama, Satyaki, Kritavarma, Bhagadatta).
weight: 5
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The response clearly identifies the dice game defeat as a decisive turning point that set the Pandavas and Kauravas on an unavoidable path to the Kurukshetra war, linking the loss, exile terms, and Draupadi’s humiliation to the breakdown of reconciliation.
weight: 5
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The response analyzes the dice game as a political maneuver that weaponized court procedure and legitimacy, showing how manipulated odds, contested staking rights, and a complicit sabha produced legal cover for dispossession and exile, reshaped elite coalitions, and hardened public narratives on justice and sovereignty (e.g. Shakuni’s role, Dhritarashtra’s vacillation, Draupadi’s legal challenge, Bhishma/Vidura dissent, Karna and Dushasana’s provocations).
weight: 4
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The response provides regional retellings from Indian states and nearby countries, noting how local culture reshapes characters, motives, and political themes (e.g. Odia Sarala Mahabharata, Kannada Kumaravyasa Bharata, Telugu Andhra Mahabharatam of Nannaya-Tikkana-Errana, Bengali Kashidasi Mahabharat, Indonesia’s Kakawin Bharatayuddha and Javanese/Balinese wayang kulit versions introducing figures like Semar and the Punakawan).
weight: 2
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response notes that the seeds of the Kurukshetra conflict were sown with early dynastic choices tracing back to King Bharata, who disrupted straightforward primogeniture by bypassing his biological sons and redefining succession via merit/adoption, and King Shantanu, whose marriages to Ganga and Satyavati and the resulting Bhishma vow and irregular succession destabilized the Kuru line, and how these decisions set precedents and structural strains that later shaped the Pandava-Kaurava rivalry.
weight: 2
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response references earlier Indian mythic events to explain how they inform the Mahabharata’s political ethics, succession disputes, and conduct of war (e.g. Rama’s exile as precedent for accepting exile terms, Manthara-Kaikeyi intrigue foreshadowing Shakuni’s counsel, Vali-Sugriva fraternal feud paralleling Kuru rivalry, Ramayana’s rajadharma and war ethics invoked as models for just rule and battlefield conduct).
weight: 2
axis: Synthesis of Information

criterion: The response explicitly contrasts the political aims and governing styles of the Pandavas and the Kauravas in at least one sentence, showing how each side justified power and rule before and during the war (e.g. Pandavas's dharma-rajya, merit and consultative rule, Pandavas honoring treaties and compromise like the 'five villages', Kauravas's consolidation at Hastinapura, court patronage and coercive realpolitik, primacy of birthright and force, use of the dice game and exile terms to retain power).
weight: 4
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The response explains the political and social aftermath of the war and shows how pre-war grievances and wartime choices shaped the settlement, governance, and long-term stability (e.g. Yudhishthira’s reluctance to rule until Bhishma’s Shanti/Anushasana Parva counsel on rajadharma; Ashvamedha to reassert authority; treatment and integration of survivors like Dhritarashtra, Gandhari, and Kunti; reconstruction, redistribution, and alliance management; Gandhari’s curse influencing later Yadava collapse; succession through Parikshit and the Pandavas’ eventual abdication).
weight: 1
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response explicitly describes Pandavas's multiple, escalating peace efforts before war step-by-step (honoring the exile terms, sending an initial envoy to demand the lawful return of their share, accepting Krishna’s peace embassy, and finally offering the minimal “five villages” compromise, while elders such as Vidura and Bhishma also urged accommodation) and briefly states the failure reason which is Duryodhana’s refusal to concede anything and Dhritarashtra’s inability to restrain him.
weight: 3
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response explicitly identifies the key incidents fueling the rivalry (e.g. Drona’s favoritism especially toward Arjuna and his refusal to train Karna, Duryodhana’s poisoning of Bhima, Arjuna’s victory at Draupadi’s swayamvara, the attempted burning of the Pandavas in the lacquer house), explaining how these events cumulatively eroded trust between the factions.
weight: 5
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The response foregrounds Duryodhana’s anger, jealousy, and arrogance as primary drivers of his political choices (e.g. the humiliation at the dice game, refusal to compromise, hardline battlefield decisions) and show how these traits precipitated the Kurukshetra war and shaped conduct during it.
weight: 3
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response clearly explains how Karna’s loyalty and rivalry, Shakuni’s manipulative counsel including the dice scheme, and Dhritarashtra’s indulgent inaction actively stoked Duryodhana’s hostility toward the Pandavas and escalated the political path to war, including effects on pre-war alliances and strategy.
weight: 5
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The response acknowledges only one side’s claims to dharma, for instance, reducing the Kauravas to ‘evil’, elevating the Pandavas to uncomplicated ‘heroes’, and ignoring the Kauravas’ framing (e.g. preserving Kuru sovereignty, obedience to the sitting king, restoring order after perceived insubordination) for the Pandavas’ framing (e.g. rightful succession and just rule, redress for the dice-game injustice and Draupadi’s humiliation, defense of treaty obligations and broader welfare), and results in one-dimensional moralizing rather than political analysis.
weight: -3
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response shows how concepts of dharma shaped choices before and during the war (e.g. Bhishma’s vow-bound loyalty to the Kuru throne despite misgivings, Drona’s duty to his patron conflicting with ethical restraint, and Arjuna’s struggle between kinship and kshatriya duty under Krishna’s counsel) and includes lesser-emphasized figures (e.g. Yuyutsu’s principled defection to the Pandavas, Vikarna’s protest during Draupadi’s humiliation despite remaining with the Kauravas) to illustrate how dharma influenced not just leaders but rank-and-file decisions.
weight: 3
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response provides credible citations, specific references to peer-reviewed research, or critical editions (e.g. academic translations, journal articles, or historical analyses) that are beyond the Mahabharata itself, showing sufficient engagement with historians, scholarly commentary, or comparative literature.
weight: 2
axis: References & Citation Quality

criterion: The response details Drupada and Draupadi’s political stakes in the conflict, showing how Drupada’s enmity with Drona shaped a revenge agenda against Hastinapura, and explains the yajña that produced Draupadi and Dhrishtadyumna as instruments of that agenda, Draupadi’s humiliation intensifying Panchala–Pandava alignment, and Dhrishtadyumna’s destined role in killing Drona as a key strategic aim rather than a mere personal vendetta.
weight: 2
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response explains how divine actors shape political choices and battlefield outcomes, linking each deity’s intervention to concrete shifts in power, morale, or strategy rather than treating them as purely religious motifs (e.g. Indra’s beggar ruse to take Karna’s kavacha-kundala, weakening Kaurava hopes; Surya’s warning to Karna, highlighting the cost of his generosity; Vishnu as Krishna guiding Pandava statecraft and Arjuna’s resolve through the Gita and the failed peace embassy; Shiva arming Arjuna with the Pasupatastra, tilting military balance).
weight: 2
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response foregrounds the text’s philosophical and political arguments while avoiding theological exposition or Yuga-cycle cosmology, and analyzes questions of sovereignty, just-war norms, counsel and diplomacy, and succession rather than devotional themes (e.g. Arjuna’s crisis as political-ethical duty, Krishna’s counsel as realpolitik and restraint doctrine, the ‘five villages’ compromise and failed embassy, rules of dharmayuddha versus battlefield violations, claims of birthright versus merit-based rule).
weight: 3
axis: Instruction Following

criterion: The response explains how Duryodhana’s entrenched hatred and the Kauravas’ zero-sum politics eroded dharmayuddha norms, leading to deliberate violations aimed at breaking Pandava morale and eliminating heirs, and links these choices to escalation dynamics during the war (e.g. Abhimanyu surrounded and killed by multiple senior warriors after being disarmed in the chakravyuha; Jayadratha’s blockade enabling the assault; Ashwatthama’s nocturnal raid on the sleeping Pandava camp with Kripa and Kritavarma, killing the Upapandavas and Panchalas).
weight: 3
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response presents information on major wartime figures (e.g. Bhishma, Drona, Karna, Salya, Jayadratha, Satyaki, Kritavarma, Drupada, Bhagadatta, Krishna/Balarama) allegiances in a clear, scannable format like a single concise table, distinguishes neutrality vs. allegiance, and flags coerced/shifted loyalties.
weight: 2
axis: Communication Quality

criterion: The response explains Dvaraka’s relationships with both sides, grounded in the multifaceted ties of Krsna and Balarama (e.g. kinship, tutelage, and factional splits) and how these shaped alignments and strategy (e.g. Krishna as Pandava ally/charioteer vs. Narayani Sena to Kauravas, Satyaki with Pandavas vs. Kritvarma with Kauravas, kinship via Kunti, Balarama teaching mace to Bhima and Duryodhana, Balarama’s neutrality).
weight: 2
axis: Implicit Criteria