> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.uzolabs.xyz/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Judging rubric

> Criteria and weights for judging BOT Chain hackathon projects fairly.

Score BOT Chain hackathon projects consistently with this rubric: five criteria, suggested weights and what each score means.

<Note>
  The weights are **suggestions**. Change them to fit your event, and publish the final rubric with your rules before building starts.
</Note>

## Eligibility check

Before scoring, confirm each project meets the [submission requirements](/hackathons/submission). Run [check\_submissions.py](/hackathons/organizers/verify-submissions) to confirm every contract is deployed on testnet and verified. Decide in advance whether an unverified contract disqualifies a project or only loses points.

## Criteria and suggested weights

| Criterion | Suggested weight | What judges ask |
| - | - | - |
| **Working product** | 30% | Does it run? Did the demo show a real testnet transaction? |
| **Use of BOT Chain** | 20% | Is the chain essential to the idea, or bolted on? Does it use BOT Chain features such as BDEX, the bridge or gasless transactions sensibly? |
| **Problem and impact** | 20% | Is the problem real and specific? Would the people who have it use this? |
| **Technical quality** | 15% | Verified contracts, readable code, tests, no secrets in the repo, sensible security. |
| **Presentation** | 15% | Clear demo and pitch inside the time limit. A README that lets a stranger run it. |

## Scoring scale

Score each criterion from 1 to 5, then multiply by its weight.

| Score | Meaning |
| - | - |
| 5 | Excellent. Would impress outside a hackathon. |
| 4 | Strong, with small gaps. |
| 3 | Meets the bar. Works, but nothing stands out. |
| 2 | Partly there. Major gaps or parts don't work. |
| 1 | Missing or doesn't work. |

**Example.** Scores of 4, 3, 5, 3, 4 give
`(4 × 0.30) + (3 × 0.20) + (5 × 0.20) + (3 × 0.15) + (4 × 0.15) = 3.85` out of 5.

## Score sheet

Copy this into a spreadsheet, one row per project per judge:

```csv score-sheet.csv theme={"dark"}
team,judge,working_product,use_of_bot_chain,problem_and_impact,technical_quality,presentation,notes
Team Example,Judge A,4,3,5,3,4,"Demo showed a swap on BDEX V2"
```

Total each row with the weights, then average across judges.

## Track prizes

If your event has tracks, judge each track with the same rubric, and add a track-fit question under **Use of BOT Chain**: does the project solve a problem the track is about?

## Fair judging

* At least two judges per project. Discuss differences of 2 or more points on any criterion.
* Judges declare conflicts of interest (mentored the team, know a member) and skip those projects.
* Score what you saw working, not what the team plans to build.
* Don't penalize teams for BOT Chain limitations, such as no WebSockets. Reward good workarounds.

## Next steps

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Verify submissions" icon="badge-check" href="/hackathons/organizers/verify-submissions">
    Check every contract before judging.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Run a hackathon" icon="calendar" href="/hackathons/organizers/run-a-hackathon">
    The full logistics checklist.
  </Card>
</CardGroup>


This documentation is built and hosted on [Mintlify](https://mintlify.com), a developer documentation platform.