Academic Writing
rebuttal-letter-strategist
Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries.
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
90Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries
4/4
86Use this skill for academic writing tasks that require explicit assumptions, bounded scope, and a reproducible output format
4/4
84Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries
4/4
82Packaged executable path(s): scripts/main.py
4/4
76End-to-end case for Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries
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 | The evaluated outputs stayed inside the Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured... workflow rather than drifting into unsupported scientific interpretation. |
| Methodological Ground | PASS | No methodological-grounding issue was recorded for rebuttal-letter-strategist in the archived evaluation. |
| 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
Performance context reached full score in the archived evaluation.
8 / 8
100%
Agent Usability
Agent usability was strong, though the workflow could surface its main conversion branches more directly.
14 / 16
88%
Human Usability
Human usability reached full score in the archived evaluation.
8 / 8
100%
Security
A modest security gap remained because the package could make its safe-use limits even clearer.
10 / 12
83%
Maintainability
The workflow is low-risk to maintain, though a little more structural cleanup would likely close the remaining gap.
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
Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries
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
Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries
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: Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries
2/4 ✓
90
Canonical✅ Pass
Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries
Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that... remained well-aligned with the documented contract in the preserved audit.
Basic 38/40|Specialized 52/60|Total 90/100
✅A1The rebuttal-letter-strategist 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 Use this skill for academic writing tasks that require explicit... scenario completed within the documented Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured... boundary.
Basic 36/40|Specialized 50/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The rebuttal-letter-strategist 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
Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries
The Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that... path verified the packaged helper command without exposing a deeper execution issue.
Basic 35/40|Specialized 49/60|Total 84/100
✅A1The rebuttal-letter-strategist 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
Packaged executable path(s): scripts/main.py remained well-aligned with the documented contract in the preserved audit.
Basic 34/40|Specialized 48/60|Total 82/100
✅A1The rebuttal-letter-strategist 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: Use rebuttal letter strategist for academic writing workflows that need structured execution, explicit assumptions, and clear output boundaries
The main issue in this stress run was: The output stays within declared skill scope and target objective.
Basic 31/40|Specialized 45/60|Total 76/100
✅A1The rebuttal-letter-strategist 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