Academic Writing
prior-auth-letter-drafter
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
90Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting
4/4
86Use this skill for academic writing tasks that require explicit assumptions, bounded scope, and a reproducible output format
4/4
84Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting
4/4
82Packaged executable path(s): scripts/main.py
4/4
76End-to-end case for Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting
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 archived evaluation preserved source-faithful writing behavior without adding unsupported results or conclusions. |
| Practice Boundaries | PASS | Practice boundaries held because the package kept to Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with... instead of claiming new evidence. |
| Methodological Ground | PASS | The legacy audit preserved a method-grounded interpretation of the Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting 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 writing workflow lands well overall, with minor remaining headroom in the final deliverable contract.
11 / 12
92%
Reliability
The archived deduction in reliability traces back to: Stabilize executable path and fallback behavior. Some inputs only reached PARTIAL due to execution gaps or weak boundary handling
10 / 12
83%
Performance & Context
The legacy audit gave full marks to performance context for this package.
8 / 8
100%
Agent Usability
The archived score suggests slightly clearer routing would help an agent choose the right dissemination path faster.
14 / 16
88%
Human Usability
No point loss was recorded for human usability in the legacy audit.
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
Maintainability stayed solid, with modest room to simplify or consolidate the conversion workflow.
10 / 12
83%
Agent-Specific
The archived deduction in agent specific traces back to: 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
Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting
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
Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting
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: Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting
2/4 ✓
90
Canonical✅ Pass
Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting
The archived evaluation treated Generate professional prior authorization request letters for... as a clean in-scope run.
Basic 38/40|Specialized 52/60|Total 90/100
✅A1The prior-auth-letter-drafter 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
The archived evaluation treated Use this skill for academic writing tasks that require explicit... as a clean in-scope run.
Basic 36/40|Specialized 50/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The prior-auth-letter-drafter 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
Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting
For Generate professional prior authorization request letters for..., the preserved evidence is lightweight but positive: the packaged validation command behaved as expected.
Basic 35/40|Specialized 49/60|Total 84/100
✅A1The prior-auth-letter-drafter 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 prior-auth-letter-drafter 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: Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting
The preserved weakness for End-to-end case for Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Generate professional prior authorization request letters for insurance companies with proper clinical justification and formatting was concentrated in one point: The output stays within declared skill scope and target objective.
Basic 31/40|Specialized 45/60|Total 76/100
✅A1The prior-auth-letter-drafter 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