acronym-unpacker
Veto GatesRequired pass for any deployment consideration
| Dimension | Result | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Scientific Integrity | PASS | Scientific integrity held because the package framed recommendations as plans to be tested, not facts already established. |
| Practice Boundaries | PASS | Practice boundaries held because the package remained focused on source handling, lookup, or structured evidence use. |
| Methodological Ground | PASS | The older review treated the package logic as methodologically aligned with its stated workflow. |
| Code Usability | PASS | The legacy audit did not flag code-usability issues for the packaged acronym-unpacker workflow. |
Core Capability88 / 100 — 8 Categories
Medical TaskExecution Average: 83.6 / 100 — Assertions: 18/20 Passed
The Intelligent medical abbreviation disambiguation tool that resolves... scenario completed within the documented Intelligent medical abbreviation disambiguation tool that resolves ambiguous acronyms using... boundary.
The Use this skill for evidence insight tasks that require explicit... scenario completed within the documented Intelligent medical abbreviation disambiguation tool that resolves ambiguous acronyms using... boundary.
The Intelligent medical abbreviation disambiguation tool that resolves... path verified the packaged helper command without exposing a deeper execution issue.
Packaged executable path(s): scripts/main.py remained well-aligned with the documented contract in the preserved audit.
This stress case was mostly intact, but the archived review centered its concern on: The output stays within declared skill scope and target objective.
Key Strengths
- Primary routing is Evidence Insight with execution mode B
- Static quality score is 88/100 and dynamic average is 83.6/100
- Assertions and command execution outcomes are recorded per input for human review