System: You are a helpful and precise assistant in checking the quality of the answer.
User: We would like to request your feedback on the performance of the response of the assistant to the user instruction displayed below. In the feedback, I want you to rate the quality of the response in these 3 categories according to each scoring rubric:

Insightfulness: Is the response creative, original or novel, including new perspectives or interpretations of existing information?
Score 1: The response is overly simplistic, lacking any originality or novelty.
Score 2: The ideas or perspectives within the response are commonplace, demonstrating a lack of originality or novelty.
Score 3: Some may perceive the response as original and novel, but others may find it ordinary or uninspiring.
Score 4: The response includes some innovative perspectives or ideas that require thoughtful consideration, yet they aren't particularly surprising.
Score 5: The response is infused with surprisingly creative perspectives or ideas that are challenging to conceive, showcasing significant originality and novelty.
Comprehension: Does the response fulfill the requirements of the instruction by providing relevant information especially when the instruction is complex and includes multiple requirements? This includes responding in accordance with the explicit and implicit purpose of given instruction.
Score 1: The response is completely unrelated to the instruction, or the model entirely misunderstands the instruction.
Score 2: Most of the key points in the response are irrelevant to the instruction, and the response misses major requirements of the instruction.
Score 3: Some major points in the response contain irrelevant information or miss some requirements of the instruction.
Score 4: The response is relevant to the instruction but misses minor requirements of the instruction.
Score 5: The response is perfectly relevant to the instruction, and the model fulfills all of the requirements of the instruction.
Readability: Is the response structured to promote readability and coherence? Does the response exhibit excellent organization?
Score 1: The response is completely unclear, making comprehension difficult.
Score 2: The response has significant areas of ambiguity or disorganization, critically affecting reader comprehension.
Score 3: The response contains some unclear components, or its organization could be improved.
Score 4: The response is generally understandable but could be further optimized for readability.
Score 5: The response is clear and well-organized, enabling the reader to effortlessly follow the content.
[Instruction]
Create a template in markdown to create scope for Jira tickets. Members should use this template as a checklist to ensure they have included all the necessary information when creating a ticket.

[Ground truth Answer]
# TO SCOPE THIS TICKET:
[] create a descriptive title
[] complete TBDs below
[] assign epic to this ticket
[] create relevant linking relations
[] delete this section
# DELETE ME AND ABOVE!

## 🧑 Story
We need to TBDTASK from TBDRESOURCE in order for TBDUSER to TBDACTION

## 🔨 Acceptance Criteria
- AC1
- AC2

## 📚 Resources
- [PLANNINGDOC1](WWWDOTEXAMPLEDOTCOM)
- [FIGMADOC1](WWWDOTEXAMPLEDOTCOM)
- [TECHDOCUMENTATION1](WWWDOTEXAMPLEDOTCOM)
- [TECHDOCUMENTATION2](WWWDOTEXAMPLEDOTCOM)

[Assistant's Response]
Here’s a comprehensive markdown template designed to help your team create a clear and thorough scope for Jira tickets. This checklist format ensures that all necessary information is included, promoting consistency and clarity across ticket submissions.

```markdown
# Jira Ticket Scope Template

## Ticket Title
- [ ] Provide a clear and concise title for the ticket.

## Description
- [ ] Describe the issue or feature in detail.
- [ ] Include any relevant background information or context.

## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] List the criteria that must be met for the ticket to be considered complete.
  - [ ] Criterion 1
  - [ ] Criterion 2
  - [ ] Criterion 3

## Steps to Reproduce (if applicable)
- [ ] Provide a step-by-step guide to reproduce the issue.
  1. Step 1
  2. Step 2
  3. Step 3

## Expected Result
- [ ] Describe what the expected outcome should be.

## Actual Result (if applicable)
- [ ] Describe what the actual outcome is, including any discrepancies from the expected result.

## Additional Information
- [ ] Include any screenshots, logs, or other relevant documents that may assist in understanding the issue.
- [ ] Mention any dependencies or related tickets that could impact this ticket.

## Assignee
- [ ] Assign the ticket to the appropriate team member responsible for addressing it.

## Priority
- [ ] Set the priority level (e.g., Low, Medium, High) to indicate the urgency.

## Labels
- [ ] Add relevant labels for categorization and easier tracking.

## Due Date
- [ ] Specify a due date if applicable to ensure timely resolution.
```

### Customization
Feel free to modify this template to better fit your team's specific needs or workflow. Encouraging team members to use this checklist will help ensure that no critical information is overlooked when creating Jira tickets.

[The End of Assistant's Response]

Please give feedback on the assistant's responses. Also, provide the assistant with a score on a scale of 1 to 5 for each category, where a higher score indicates better overall performance. Make sure to give feedback or comments for each category first and then write the score for each category. Only write the feedback corresponding to the scoring rubric for each category. The scores of each category should be orthogonal, indicating that 'Efficiency of User Alignment' should not be considered for 'Readability of User Alignment' category, for example. 

Lastly, return a Python dictionary object that has skillset names as keys and the corresponding scores as values.

[System]



Assistant: