Academic Writing
irb-application-assistant
Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists. Use when the user mentions IRB, Institutional Review Board, research ethics, human subjects research, protocol review, informed consent, or needs help preparing or reviewing an IRB application or submission.
85100Total 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
18 / 20 Passed
90Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists
4/4
86Use this skill for academic writing tasks that require explicit assumptions, bounded scope, and a reproducible output format
4/4
84Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists
4/4
82Packaged executable path(s): scripts/main.py
4/4
76End-to-end case for Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists. Use when the user mentions IRB, Institutional Review Board, research ethics, human subjects research, protocol review, informed consent, or needs help preparing or reviewing an IRB application or submission
2/4
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 review did not flag invented scientific claims in the package's writing-oriented output. |
| Practice Boundaries | PASS | Practice boundaries held because the package kept to Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including... instead of claiming new evidence. |
| Methodological Ground | PASS | The older review treated the package logic as methodologically aligned with its stated workflow. |
| Code Usability | N/A | The audited output is a narrative or formatting deliverable rather than a code-first scientific workflow. |
Core Capability88 / 100 — 8 Categories
Functional Suitability
The archived review left a small gap in how directly Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including... resolves into a polished dissemination deliverable.
11 / 12
92%
Reliability
Related legacy finding for irb-application-assistant: Stabilize executable path and fallback behavior. Some inputs only reached PARTIAL due to execution gaps or weak boundary handling
10 / 12
83%
Performance & Context
Performance context reached full score in the archived evaluation.
8 / 8
100%
Agent Usability
The package guides agents reasonably well, while still leaving a little room for crisper trigger wording.
14 / 16
88%
Human Usability
The legacy audit gave full marks to human usability for this package.
8 / 8
100%
Security
Security scored well, though the archived review still left some room to state source-faithful boundaries more explicitly.
10 / 12
83%
Maintainability
The archived review treated the package as maintainable overall, while still leaving some cleanup headroom.
10 / 12
83%
Agent-Specific
Agent specific was softened by the legacy issue '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: 83.6 / 100 — Assertions: 18/20 Passed
90
Canonical
Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists
4/4 ✓
86
Variant A
Use this skill for academic writing tasks that require explicit assumptions, bounded scope, and a reproducible output format
4/4 ✓
84
Edge
Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists
4/4 ✓
82
Variant B
Packaged executable path(s): scripts/main.py
4/4 ✓
76
Stress
End-to-end case for Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists. Use when the user mentions IRB, Institutional Review Board, research ethics, human subjects research, protocol review, informed consent, or needs help preparing or reviewing an IRB application or submission
2/4 ✓
90
Canonical✅ Pass
Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists
The archived evaluation treated Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB)... as a clean in-scope run.
Basic 38/40|Specialized 52/60|Total 90/100
✅A1The irb-application-assistant output structure covers required deliverable blocks
✅A2Script execution path is available (command exit code is 0)
✅A3The output stays within declared skill scope and target objective
✅A4Required research safety/boundary guidance is present without overclaims
Pass rate: 4 / 4
86
Variant A✅ Pass
Use this skill for academic writing tasks that require explicit assumptions, bounded scope, and a reproducible output format
Use this skill for academic writing tasks that require explicit... remained well-aligned with the documented contract in the preserved audit.
Basic 36/40|Specialized 50/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The irb-application-assistant output structure covers required deliverable blocks
✅A2Script execution path is available (command exit code is 0)
✅A3The output stays within declared skill scope and target objective
✅A4Required research safety/boundary guidance is present without overclaims
Pass rate: 4 / 4
84
Edge✅ Pass
Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists
The archived run for Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB)... confirmed the helper entrypoint and left the workflow in a stable state.
Basic 35/40|Specialized 49/60|Total 84/100
✅A1The irb-application-assistant output structure covers required deliverable blocks
✅A2Script execution path is available (command exit code is 0)
✅A3The output stays within declared skill scope and target objective
✅A4Required research safety/boundary guidance is present without overclaims
Pass rate: 4 / 4
82
Variant B✅ Pass
Packaged executable path(s): scripts/main.py
The archived evaluation treated Packaged executable path(s): scripts/main.py as a clean in-scope run.
Basic 34/40|Specialized 48/60|Total 82/100
✅A1The irb-application-assistant output structure covers required deliverable blocks
✅A2Script execution path is available (command exit code is 0)
✅A3The output stays within declared skill scope and target objective
✅A4Required research safety/boundary guidance is present without overclaims
Pass rate: 4 / 4
76
Stress✅ Pass
End-to-end case for Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Assists researchers with Institutional Review Board (IRB) application tasks, including drafting informed consent documents, reviewing research protocols for compliance, generating application forms, and preparing submission checklists. Use when the user mentions IRB, Institutional Review Board, research ethics, human subjects research, protocol review, informed consent, or needs help preparing or reviewing an IRB application or submission
This stress case was mostly intact, but the archived review centered its concern on: The output stays within declared skill scope and target objective.
Basic 31/40|Specialized 45/60|Total 76/100
✅A1The irb-application-assistant output structure covers required deliverable blocks
✅A2Script execution path is available (command exit code is 0)
❌A3The output stays within declared skill scope and target objective
❌A4Required research safety/boundary guidance is present without overclaims
Pass rate: 2 / 4
Medical Task Total83.6 / 100
Key Strengths
- Primary routing is Academic Writing 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