Other

sci-paper-reviewer

87100Total 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
15 / 20 Passed
86When a user uploads a manuscript (PDF/DOC/DOCX/TXT) and asks for an SCI-style peer review
3/4
86When a user wants an innovation/novelty score (1–12) with explicit criteria and justification
3/4
86Automatic manuscript parsing for PDF, Word, and TXT, plus direct text input
3/4
86Section-oriented analysis: focuses on Abstract, Results, Introduction, and Discussion
3/4
86End-to-end case for Automatic manuscript parsing for PDF, Word, and TXT, plus direct text input
3/4

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 Capability88 / 100 — 8 Categories

Functional Suitability
The archived deduction in functional suitability traces back to: Improve stress-case output rigor. Stress and boundary scenarios show weaker consistency
11 / 12
92%
Reliability
Related legacy finding for sci-paper-reviewer: Improve stress-case output rigor. Stress and boundary scenarios show weaker consistency
10 / 12
83%
Performance & Context
No point loss was recorded for performance context in the legacy audit.
8 / 8
100%
Agent Usability
The legacy audit deducted points for sci-paper-reviewer in agent usability.
14 / 16
88%
Human Usability
The legacy audit gave full marks to human usability for this package.
8 / 8
100%
Security
A modest deduction remained in security for sci-paper-reviewer in the archived review.
10 / 12
83%
Maintainability
The legacy audit deducted points for sci-paper-reviewer in maintainability.
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: 86 / 100 — Assertions: 15/20 Passed

86
Canonical
When a user uploads a manuscript (PDF/DOC/DOCX/TXT) and asks for an SCI-style peer review
3/4 ✓
86
Variant A
When a user wants an innovation/novelty score (1–12) with explicit criteria and justification
3/4 ✓
86
Edge
Automatic manuscript parsing for PDF, Word, and TXT, plus direct text input
3/4 ✓
86
Variant B
Section-oriented analysis: focuses on Abstract, Results, Introduction, and Discussion
3/4 ✓
86
Stress
End-to-end case for Automatic manuscript parsing for PDF, Word, and TXT, plus direct text input
3/4 ✓
86
Canonical✅ Pass
When a user uploads a manuscript (PDF/DOC/DOCX/TXT) and asks for an SCI-style peer review

The When a user uploads a manuscript (PDF/DOC/DOCX/TXT) and asks for an... workflow is defined, but this run was blocked by a missing local input file.

Basic 33/40|Specialized 53/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The sci-paper-reviewer output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
86
Variant A✅ Pass
When a user wants an innovation/novelty score (1–12) with explicit criteria and justification

The archived execution for When a user wants an innovation/novelty score (1–12) with explicit... failed for environmental reasons rather than workflow ambiguity: a required file was missing.

Basic 31/40|Specialized 55/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The sci-paper-reviewer output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
86
Edge✅ Pass
Automatic manuscript parsing for PDF, Word, and TXT, plus direct text input

Automatic manuscript parsing for PDF, Word, and TXT, plus direct... stayed well-scoped, but the local run could not proceed because the expected input file was absent.

Basic 30/40|Specialized 56/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The sci-paper-reviewer output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
86
Variant B✅ Pass
Section-oriented analysis: focuses on Abstract, Results, Introduction, and Discussion

The Section-oriented analysis: focuses on Abstract, Results,... workflow is defined, but this run was blocked by a missing local input file.

Basic 29/40|Specialized 57/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The sci-paper-reviewer output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
86
Stress✅ Pass
End-to-end case for Automatic manuscript parsing for PDF, Word, and TXT, plus direct text input

End-to-end case for Automatic manuscript parsing for PDF, Word, and... stayed well-scoped, but the local run could not proceed because the expected input file was absent.

Basic 26/40|Specialized 60/60|Total 86/100
✅A1The sci-paper-reviewer output structure matches the documented deliverable
❌A2The script execution path completed successfully for the documented case
✅A3The output stays fully within the documented skill boundary
✅A4The response quality is acceptable for the documented path
Pass rate: 3 / 4
Medical Task Total86 / 100

Key Strengths

  • Primary routing is Other with execution mode B
  • Static quality score is 88/100 and dynamic average is 71.6/100
  • Assertions and command execution outcomes are recorded per input for human review
  • Execution verification summary: Script verification 0/1; adjustment=0. enhanced_document_parser.py: rc=1