Why would it be more effective than peer and student review? I'm not saying that those are effective systems on their own (the bigger argument is whether academia is interested in "watchdog" regulation of instructional quality, which I would argue, "No")...but I don't think too many people are going to be enthusiastic about "ineptness" being quantified by what's found on a syllabus.

It'd be like writing a tool that evaluated developers based on what languages or libraries they used, as found on their Github repos.

A bad instructor can have a fantastic syllabus.

I'm sure we can come up with some more interesting uses!