Data Analysis

study-design-scale-selector

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
87Determines the appropriate Risk of Bias assessment scale for a medical study based on its design (RCT, Cohort, etc.), using PubMed metadata lookup or text analysis
3/4
86Analyze Text (Fallback)
3/4
86Analyze Text (Fallback)
3/4
86Select Scale
3/4
86Output
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
Research Veto✅ PASS — Applicable
DimensionResultDetail
Scientific IntegrityPASSThe archived review kept this workflow anchored to supplied data fields and observable execution behavior, not fabricated results.
Practice BoundariesPASSThe evaluated outputs stayed inside the Determines the appropriate Risk of Bias assessment scale for a medical study based on its... and did not drift into unsupported interpretation beyond the available inputs.
Methodological GroundPASSThe archived review found the package methodologically anchored to a named assessment rule set.
Code UsabilityPASSThe archived review found the packaged execution path for study-design-scale-selector usable in its intended context.

Core Capability88 / 1008 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
10 / 12
83%
Performance & Context
No point loss was recorded for performance context in the legacy audit.
8 / 8
100%
Agent Usability
Agent usability was strong, but the workflow could surface its entry conditions a little more directly.
14 / 16
88%
Human Usability
Human usability reached full score in the archived evaluation.
8 / 8
100%
Security
Security remained strong, though the archived review still left some room for clearer execution guardrails.
10 / 12
83%
Maintainability
The archived review treated the package as maintainable, while still preserving some room for cleanup.
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: 86.2 / 100 — Assertions: 15/20 Passed

87
Canonical
Determines the appropriate Risk of Bias assessment scale for a medical study based on its design (RCT, Cohort, etc.), using PubMed metadata lookup or text analysis
3/4
86
Variant A
Analyze Text (Fallback)
3/4
86
Edge
Analyze Text (Fallback)
3/4
86
Variant B
Select Scale
3/4
86
Stress
Output
3/4
87
Canonical✅ Pass
Determines the appropriate Risk of Bias assessment scale for a medical study based on its design (RCT, Cohort, etc.), using PubMed metadata lookup or text analysis

Determines the appropriate Risk of Bias assessment scale for a... remains a defined path, although the preserved example command was not directly runnable because placeholder values were never resolved.

Basic 33/40|Specialized 54/60|Total 87/100
A1The study-design-scale-selector 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
Analyze Text (Fallback)

The archived command path for Analyze Text (Fallback) was structurally clear, yet still placeholder-bound.

Basic 31/40|Specialized 55/60|Total 86/100
A1The study-design-scale-selector 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
Analyze Text (Fallback)

Analyze Text (Fallback) remains a defined path, although the preserved example command was not directly runnable because placeholder values were never resolved.

Basic 30/40|Specialized 56/60|Total 86/100
A1The study-design-scale-selector 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
Select Scale

Select Scale remains a defined path, although the preserved example command was not directly runnable because placeholder values were never resolved.

Basic 29/40|Specialized 57/60|Total 86/100
A1The study-design-scale-selector 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
Output

The Output workflow is specified, but the execution example still depends on unresolved placeholders.

Basic 26/40|Specialized 60/60|Total 86/100
A1The study-design-scale-selector 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 Total86.2 / 100

Key Strengths

  • Primary routing is Data Analysis with execution mode B
  • Static quality score is 88/100 and dynamic average is 72.6/100
  • Assertions and command execution outcomes are recorded per input for human review
  • Execution verification summary: Script verification 2/2; adjustment=5. extract_pdf.py: OK; selector.py: OK