Evidence Insight
citation-management
87100Total Score
Core Capability
88 / 100
Functional Suitability
11 / 12
Reliability
10 / 12
Performance & Context
8 / 8
Agent Usability
14 / 16
Human Usability
8 / 8
Security
10 / 12
Maintainability
10 / 12
Agent-Specific
17 / 20
Medical Task
15 / 20 Passed
88You need to find relevant or highly cited papers on a topic using Google Scholar or PubMed
3/4
86You have identifiers (e.g., DOI, PMID, arXiv ID, URL) and must convert them into correct BibTeX
3/4
86Paper discovery
3/4
86Google Scholar search with year filtering, pagination, and citation-count sorting
3/4
86End-to-end case for Paper discovery
3/4
Veto GatesRequired pass for any deployment consideration
Skill Veto✓ All 4 gates passed
✓
Operational Stability
System remains stable across varied inputs and edge cases
PASS✓
Structural Consistency
Output structure conforms to expected skill contract format
PASS✓
Result Determinism
Equivalent inputs produce semantically equivalent outputs
PASS✓
System Security
No prompt injection, data leakage, or unsafe tool use detected
PASSResearch Veto✅ PASS — Applicable
| Dimension | Result | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Scientific Integrity | PASS | The legacy audit did not indicate that retrieval outputs were presented as unsupported findings. |
| Practice Boundaries | PASS | The legacy review kept this workflow on the evidence-access side of the boundary, not the advice-giving side. |
| Methodological Ground | PASS | The older review treated the package logic as methodologically aligned with its stated workflow. |
| Code Usability | PASS | The packaged retrieval surface remained understandable at the command and parameter level in the archived review. |
Core Capability88 / 100 — 8 Categories
Functional Suitability
Related legacy finding for citation-management: Improve stress-case output rigor. Stress and boundary scenarios show weaker consistency
11 / 12
92%
Reliability
Reliability was softened by the legacy issue 'Improve stress-case output rigor'. Stress and boundary scenarios show weaker consistency
10 / 12
83%
Performance & Context
The legacy audit gave full marks to performance context for this package.
8 / 8
100%
Agent Usability
A modest deduction remained in agent usability for citation-management in the archived review.
14 / 16
88%
Human Usability
No point loss was recorded for human usability in the legacy audit.
8 / 8
100%
Security
The archived evaluation left some headroom for citation-management under security.
10 / 12
83%
Maintainability
The archived evaluation left some headroom for citation-management under maintainability.
10 / 12
83%
Agent-Specific
Related legacy finding for citation-management: Stabilize executable path and fallback behavior. Some inputs only reached PARTIAL due to execution gaps or weak boundary handling
17 / 20
85%
Core Capability Total88 / 100
Medical TaskExecution Average: 86.4 / 100 — Assertions: 15/20 Passed
88
Canonical
You need to find relevant or highly cited papers on a topic using Google Scholar or PubMed
3/4 ✓
86
Variant A
You have identifiers (e.g., DOI, PMID, arXiv ID, URL) and must convert them into correct BibTeX
3/4 ✓
86
Edge
Paper discovery
3/4 ✓
86
Variant B
Google Scholar search with year filtering, pagination, and citation-count sorting
3/4 ✓
86
Stress
End-to-end case for Paper discovery
3/4 ✓
88
Canonical✅ Pass
You need to find relevant or highly cited papers on a topic using Google Scholar or PubMed
The main issue in this canonical run was: The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case.
Basic 33/40|Specialized 55/60|Total 88/100
✅A1The citation-management output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
86
Variant A✅ Pass
You have identifiers (e.g., DOI, PMID, arXiv ID, URL) and must convert them into correct BibTeX
The preserved weakness for You have identifiers (e.g., DOI, PMID, arXiv ID, URL) and must convert them into correct BibTeX was concentrated in one point: The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case.
Basic 31/40|Specialized 55/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The citation-management output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
86
Edge✅ Pass
Paper discovery
The preserved weakness for Paper discovery was concentrated in one point: The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case.
Basic 30/40|Specialized 56/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The citation-management output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
86
Variant B✅ Pass
Google Scholar search with year filtering, pagination, and citation-count sorting
The preserved weakness for Google Scholar search with year filtering, pagination, and citation-count sorting was concentrated in one point: The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case.
Basic 29/40|Specialized 57/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The citation-management output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
86
Stress✅ Pass
End-to-end case for Paper discovery
The preserved weakness for End-to-end case for Paper discovery was concentrated in one point: The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case.
Basic 26/40|Specialized 60/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The citation-management output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
Medical Task Total86.4 / 100
Key Strengths
- Primary routing is Evidence Insight with execution mode B
- Static quality score is 88/100 and dynamic average is 73.6/100
- Assertions and command execution outcomes are recorded per input for human review
- Execution verification summary: Script verification 6/6; adjustment=5. doi_to_bibtex.py: OK; extract_metadata.py: OK; format_bibtex.py: OK; search_google_scholar.py: OK