Other

docx-feedback-tracker

Automatically detect DOCX track-changes history, version rounds, and author feedback to generate a Markdown modification explanation file when you run it on one or more DOCX versions.

86100Total Score
Core Capability
85 / 100
Functional Suitability
11 / 12
Reliability
9 / 12
Performance & Context
7 / 8
Agent Usability
14 / 16
Human Usability
8 / 8
Security
11 / 12
Maintainability
9 / 12
Agent-Specific
16 / 20
Medical Task
20 / 20 Passed
90You receive a DOCX with Track Changes and/or Comments enabled and need a consolidated change log by author
4/4
86You have multiple DOCX versions (e.g., -v1, -v2, -v3) and want to reconstruct round-based modifications into a single report
4/4
85Detect and attribute changes to track-changes authors and comment authors
4/4
85Extract insertions and deletions from DOCX OOXML (w:ins / w:del) and comments
4/4
85End-to-end case for Detect and attribute changes to track-changes authors and comment authors
4/4

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
PASS

Core Capability85 / 100 — 8 Categories

Functional Suitability
Functional suitability was softened by the legacy issue 'Improve stress-case output rigor'. Stress and boundary scenarios show weaker consistency
11 / 12
92%
Reliability
The archived deduction in reliability traces back to: Improve stress-case output rigor. Stress and boundary scenarios show weaker consistency
9 / 12
75%
Performance & Context
The archived evaluation left some headroom for docx-feedback-tracker under performance context.
7 / 8
88%
Agent Usability
The legacy audit deducted points for docx-feedback-tracker in agent usability.
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 docx-feedback-tracker under security.
11 / 12
92%
Maintainability
The legacy audit deducted points for docx-feedback-tracker in maintainability.
9 / 12
75%
Agent-Specific
The archived deduction in agent specific traces back to: Improve stress-case output rigor. Stress and boundary scenarios show weaker consistency
16 / 20
80%
Core Capability Total85 / 100

Medical TaskExecution Average: 86.2 / 100 — Assertions: 20/20 Passed

90
Canonical
You receive a DOCX with Track Changes and/or Comments enabled and need a consolidated change log by author
4/4 ✓
86
Variant A
You have multiple DOCX versions (e.g., -v1, -v2, -v3) and want to reconstruct round-based modifications into a single report
4/4 ✓
85
Edge
Detect and attribute changes to track-changes authors and comment authors
4/4 ✓
85
Variant B
Extract insertions and deletions from DOCX OOXML (w:ins / w:del) and comments
4/4 ✓
85
Stress
End-to-end case for Detect and attribute changes to track-changes authors and comment authors
4/4 ✓
90
Canonical✅ Pass
You receive a DOCX with Track Changes and/or Comments enabled and need a consolidated change log by author

The archived run for You receive a DOCX with Track Changes and/or Comments enabled and... remained guidance-driven rather than command-driven.

Basic 36/40|Specialized 54/60|Total 90/100
✅A1The docx-feedback-tracker output structure matches the documented deliverable
✅A2The instruction path remains actionable for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 4 / 4
86
Variant A✅ Pass
You have multiple DOCX versions (e.g., -v1, -v2, -v3) and want to reconstruct round-based modifications into a single report

This variant a case stayed inside the documented workflow and remained instruction-led.

Basic 34/40|Specialized 52/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The docx-feedback-tracker output structure matches the documented deliverable
✅A2The instruction path remains actionable for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 4 / 4
85
Edge✅ Pass
Detect and attribute changes to track-changes authors and comment authors

This edge case stayed inside the documented workflow and remained instruction-led.

Basic 33/40|Specialized 52/60|Total 85/100
✅A1The docx-feedback-tracker output structure matches the documented deliverable
✅A2The instruction path remains actionable for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 4 / 4
85
Variant B✅ Pass
Extract insertions and deletions from DOCX OOXML (w:ins / w:del) and comments

The archived run for Extract insertions and deletions from DOCX OOXML (w:ins / w:del)... remained guidance-driven rather than command-driven.

Basic 32/40|Specialized 53/60|Total 85/100
✅A1The docx-feedback-tracker output structure matches the documented deliverable
✅A2The instruction path remains actionable for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 4 / 4
85
Stress✅ Pass
End-to-end case for Detect and attribute changes to track-changes authors and comment authors

End-to-end case for Detect and attribute changes to track-changes... was evaluated as a bounded documentation path, not as a runnable script workflow.

Basic 29/40|Specialized 56/60|Total 85/100
✅A1The docx-feedback-tracker output structure matches the documented deliverable
✅A2The instruction path remains actionable for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 4 / 4
Medical Task Total86.2 / 100

Key Strengths

  • Primary routing is Other with execution mode A
  • Static quality score is 85/100 and dynamic average is 77.6/100
  • Assertions and command execution outcomes are recorded per input for human review
  • Execution verification summary: No script verification was applicable