For the purposes of the database, tools are assessed qualitatively against the below criteria. These criteria are preliminary and subject to evolution. Their design is based on the range ‘actually-existing’ tools, across both norms and outliers, in order to pragmatically assess their contribution.

Resources are not evaluated in this way, though many touch upon the questions raised.

→ The degree to which the construction and function of the tool is visible and auditable.
→ How easily audited is the tool?
→ Is the code OS?

Creative Malleability
→ the range within which the output of the tools can vary.
→ i.e. does it produce similar results most of the time?

Technical Interoperability
→ How technically modifiable is the tool?
→ Can the tool be interfaced with others?

Calibre of research
→ How research-driven is the tool?
→ Are their accompanying materials which situate or explain design decision, testing, and background?
→ What is the tendency for publishing to their community?

Propensity to redistribute
→ How much value does it transfer from private to the public?
→ Conversely, how much value does the tool, and its adoption, tranfer value from public resources to privately governed infrastructure? ➫ How much does it grow existing public value?