competitor-trial-monitor
Monitor competitor clinical trial progress and alert on market risks.
Veto GatesRequired pass for any deployment consideration
| Dimension | Result | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Scientific Integrity | PASS | The archived audit treated this workflow as hypothesis or protocol support, not as a source of validated results. |
| 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 | No code-usability failure was preserved for competitor-trial-monitor in the legacy evaluation. |
Core Capability88 / 100 — 8 Categories
Medical TaskExecution Average: 83.6 / 100 — Assertions: 18/20 Passed
The Monitor competitor clinical trial progress and alert on market risks scenario completed within the documented Monitor competitor clinical trial progress and alert on market risks boundary.
The archived evaluation treated Use this skill for evidence insight tasks that require explicit... as a clean in-scope run.
The archived run for Monitor competitor clinical trial progress and alert on market risks confirmed the helper entrypoint and left the workflow in a stable state.
Packaged executable path(s): scripts/main.py remained well-aligned with the documented contract in the preserved audit.
The preserved weakness for End-to-end case for Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Monitor competitor clinical trial progress and alert on market risks was concentrated in one point: 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