↯Clarificeprototype
DayWeekQuarter
← Dashboard
VB

Vera Bianchi

Engineer · Engineering · IC3 · reports to Sven Farouk

Useful score · Week ending Jul 7
59Solid
vs Engineering · IC3 (n=10)

Driving value

  • ▴ Tool leverage: top of cohort (85th pct)
  • ▴ Engagement (raw activity): top of cohort (80th pct)

Watch-outs

  • —
Outcomes
0
docs, PRs, features, decisions
Value delivered
0.0
impact × credit
Days worked
1
no time off
Follow-through
—
no commitments due

Projects they shaped

attributed from evidence · no self-review needed
Fix the log noise
Contributor · 1% credit
shipped
Fix the deprecated endpoint
Contributor · 2% credit
shipped
Fix the dependency bump
Contributor · 2% credit
shipped
Webhook delivery pipeline
Reviewer · 25% credit
Delivery success 99.95%
Auth token refresh
Contributor · 5% credit
p99 latency −30%
add wait-for to the webhook e2e
Lead · 58% credit
shipped
Billing ledger migration
Contributor · 9% credit
Failed payments −18%
Throttle per-tenant quotas
Lead · 54% credit
in progress

Activity flow

ClaudeSlackJira
2026-07-012026-07-01

Why this score

weighted sum of cohort percentiles
Value delivered0 pts/day · weight 45%50th pct → +22.5
Collaboration1 peers+threads · weight 20%60th pct → +12.0
Consistency0.5 0–1 · weight 15%50th pct → +7.5
Tool leverage3 tools · weight 10%85th pct → +8.5
Engagement (raw activity)3 signals/day · weight 10%80th pct → +8.0
Useful score58.5

Evidence vs level rubric

Senior IC · IC3
Evidence tracks at level

Evidence broadly supports the current-level expectations.

  • Impact & scope
    Owns features including their edge cases.
    ✓Strong evidence
    • · Led “Throttle per-tenant quotas” (in progress), “add wait-for to the webhook e2e” (shipped)
    • · Value delivered in the 46th percentile of their track · 0 outcomes
    e.g. shipped the payments retry work end-to-end
  • Collaboration & influence
    Works well with their team and builds shared context.
    ~Some evidence
    • · Collaboration signal in the 45th percentile of track
    • · Contributed to 8 cross-team projects
  • Execution & reliability
    Reliably delivers what they commit to; unblocks others.
    ○Human-assessed
    • · Too few decided commitments this period to judge
  • Direction & judgment
    Makes sound technical/product decisions others build on.
    ✓Strong evidence
    • · Led 2 projects to a result
  • Craft & quality
    Sustains high quality and a steady, dependable cadence.
    ~Some evidence
    • · Cadence in the 50th percentile of track

Evidence mapped to your imported rubric. A human makes the leveling call — this is the receipts, not the verdict. Evidence found for 4 of 5 expectations.

Follow-through

did they do what they committed to?
—0/0 commitments kept
  • No commitments due this period.

AI leverage & augmentation

what agents can take on · what’s above an agent
33%of observed activity is routine enough to offload to an agent
AI-assisted · 67%Routine · automatable · 33%

Above an agent

  • ▴ Little human-differentiated output observed this period

Task-level augmentation analysis — where agents can help and where human work must be kept. Not a person-level replaceability score.

Value chains & cost

signal → meeting → doc → shipped · with a cost ledger

No reconstructed value chains in this period.

Outcomes this period

None recorded.