Project 2: Full-Stack Application
Defines a graded full-stack project assignment requiring AI modalities, authentication, CI/CD, and Agile documentation.
What this file does
Defines a graded full-stack project assignment requiring AI modalities, authentication, CI/CD, and Agile documentation.
When to use it
- You need a rubric for a university course project
- You are designing a full-stack assignment with AI tool requirements
- You want to enforce Agile process documentation in a project
- You need grading criteria for test coverage and CI/CD pipelines
Assumes this stack
Project 2: Full-Stack Application
Due: Friday by 2:59am
Points: 200
Weight: 20% of final grade
Objective
Integrate multiple AI modalities with professional engineering practices to build a complete full-stack application.
Approval Requirement
Project idea must be approved by the professor on the #projects Slack channel at least one week before the deadline.
Requirements
Functional Requirements
- Complete full-stack (frontend + backend + database)
- User authentication (JWT or OAuth)
- 3+ distinct features/roles
- Real-time updates OR complex state management
- Public API with documentation
- Professional UI/UX
Technical Requirements
- Use the two AI modalities appropriately (Claude Web + IDE Centric)
- Tech Stack: React/Next.js + TailwindCSS, Node.js/Express or Next.js API routes, PostgreSQL or MongoDB
- 80%+ test coverage (Unit + Integration + E2E)
- Evaluation suite with automated tests, code quality metrics, security scanning
- Advanced CI/CD: multi-stage pipeline, deploy previews, coverage reporting
Agile Process
- 2+ documented sprints
- Sprint planning documents and retrospectives
- User stories with acceptance criteria
Deliverables
- GitHub repository
- Deployed app (production URL)
- Eval dashboard (live or screenshots) - professor:"For eval dashboard what I would submit is a document (preferably pdf maybe md, HTML) that shows the results of running your test suite (npm run test)"
- Complete documentation package
- 10-minute demo video
- 1500-word technical blog post
Rubric (200 points)
| Category | Points | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Functionality | 45 | Features complete, authentication working, API functional |
| Technical Excellence | 60 | Code quality, architecture, test coverage (80%+) |
| AI Mastery | 30 | Effective use of all 3 modalities |
| CI/CD & DevOps | 30 | Pipeline quality, deployment, monitoring |
| Agile Process | 20 | Sprint documentation, retrospectives |
| Documentation | 15 | README, API docs, blog post quality |
Functionality (45 pts)
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 45 | Excellent – All features complete, authentication working perfectly, API functional and well-designed, polished UI/UX |
| 36 | Good – Most features complete, authentication works, API functional, good UI/UX |
| 27 | Satisfactory – Core features work, basic authentication, API works, acceptable UI/UX |
| 18 | Needs Improvement – Some features missing, auth issues, API problems, poor UI/UX |
| 0 | Unsatisfactory – Major features broken or missing |
Technical Excellence (60 pts)
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 60 | Excellent – Outstanding architecture, 80%+ test coverage, excellent database design, strong security practices |
| 48 | Good – Good architecture, 70–79% coverage, good database design, adequate security |
| 36 | Satisfactory – Acceptable architecture, 60–69% coverage, basic database design, some security |
| 24 | Needs Improvement – Weak architecture, <60% coverage, poor database design, security gaps |
| 0 | Unsatisfactory – No clear architecture, minimal tests, major security issues |
AI Mastery (30 pts)
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 30 | Excellent – Effective use of all 3 modalities with clear documentation of when/why each was used |
| 24 | Good – Good use of all 3 modalities, mostly documented |
| 18 | Satisfactory – Used all 3 modalities but with limited effectiveness or documentation |
| 12 | Needs Improvement – Missing modality or poor usage, weak documentation |
| 0 | Unsatisfactory – Did not demonstrate multi-modality usage |
CI/CD & DevOps (30 pts)
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 30 | Excellent – Multi-stage pipeline, deploy previews, coverage reporting, security scanning, automated deployment |
| 24 | Good – Working pipeline with most features, good automation |
| 18 | Satisfactory – Basic pipeline working, some automation |
| 12 | Needs Improvement – Incomplete pipeline, manual steps required |
| 0 | Unsatisfactory – No working CI/CD pipeline |
Agile Process (20 pts)
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 20 | Excellent – 2+ well-documented sprints, clear planning docs, insightful retrospectives |
| 16 | Good – 2 sprints documented, good planning, useful retrospectives |
| 12 | Satisfactory – Basic sprint documentation, some planning evident |
| 8 | Needs Improvement – Incomplete sprint docs, minimal planning |
| 0 | Unsatisfactory – No agile process documentation |
Documentation (15 pts)
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 15 | Excellent – Comprehensive README, complete API docs, quality blog post, excellent demo video |
| 12 | Good – Good README and API docs, solid blog post and demo |
| 9 | Satisfactory – Adequate documentation across all areas |
| 6 | Needs Improvement – Incomplete or poor quality documentation |
| 0 | Unsatisfactory – Missing major documentation components |
Total: 200 points
What's inside
Objective, approval requirement, functional/technical requirements, deliverables, rubric with 6 categories and score tables
Change this for your project
- Replace
Due: Friday by 2:59amwith your own deadline - Replace
Points: 200with your own point total - Replace
Weight: 20% of final gradewith your own weight - Replace
JasonIngersoll9000/Debate-me-browith your repository name
Where it goes
Keep it in your repository where the agent or team that needs it will read it.
Worth borrowing
- Rubric with explicit score bands per category for objective grading
- Requiring professor approval via Slack channel one week before deadline
- Mandating 2+ documented sprints with planning and retrospectives
Related Documents
OpenCode Agents
Provides a collection of specialised Markdown agent files for OpenCode, each with a distinct role and thinking algorithm.
🌟 GitHub MCP Server - Feature Showcase
Showcases eight GitHub MCP server tools with example inputs, outputs, and real-world use cases for AI agents.
Chloe 部署文档
Guides you through deploying an enhanced SillyTavern fork with direct, Docker, and reverse-proxy setups, plus security hardening and troubleshooting.
Software License Compliance Report
Documents that all dependencies in an early cancer prediction project are FOSS and OSI-approved, confirming commercial use is permitted.