跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

completeness-auditor

Audit whether the semantic evidence required by the active lean or submission profile exists and is current, without requiring one verbose artifact per skill or an arbitrary number of pass bullets.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

查看安装方法

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md2.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Purpose

Check deliverable evidence, not whether every invoked skill left a ceremonial report.

Lean Checks

Per active Qx, require as applicable:

  • manifest;
  • method card;
  • human decision ledger;
  • risk-probe summary;
  • latest run summary.

Lean completeness does not require final reports, freeze, paper, or G6 artifacts.

Submission Checks

Per Qx require:

  • final method explanation;
  • current language review JSON with all required named checks passing;
  • final result analysis;
  • robustness report;
  • solution package;
  • current frozen numbers;
  • paper section and referenced figures.

Globally require symbol table, assumptions, references, consistency audit, completeness audit, and QA report.

Workflow

  1. Read rigor_profile.
  2. Resolve active Qx from manifests or artifacts.
  3. Check required artifacts and semantic fields.
  4. Check staleness only against materially cited evidence.
  5. Accept documented legacy equivalents during migration.
  6. Save paper/audits/completeness_audit.md only in submission/final mode.

Status

  • PRESENT: required evidence exists and is current.
  • MISSING: required evidence absent.
  • INSUFFICIENT: artifact exists but required semantic fields/checks are missing.
  • STALE: cited material evidence changed after approval/review.
  • NOT_APPLICABLE: justified by task/profile.

Rules

  • Do not require ≥5 prose pass items.
  • Do not require a report just because a skill ran.
  • Do not mark a decision stale for unrelated code, formatting, or file changes.
  • Do not treat legacy artifact count as proof of semantic completeness.
  • Do not repair artifacts during audit.

Verification

  • Requirements match the active profile.
  • Every gap names the missing evidence and producer/owner.
  • Staleness links to a material changed source.
  • Final verdict is PASSED only when all submission requirements are satisfied.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Detect whether approved modeling code is Python or MATLAB/Beita Tianyuan and route it to the matching reviewer using the compact named-check review contract.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills10602026年9月24日 更新

Run scoped or final cross-media consistency checks for mathematical-modeling artifacts, comparing canonical numbers, symbols, parameters, decisions, files, and paper claims without performing full-workspace audits for low-risk changes.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills10602026年9月24日 更新

Map contest attachments to subquestions, audit and clean raw data, and emit one reusable data profile with quality, coverage, imbalance, concentration, and method-readiness evidence for downstream risk screening.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills10602026年9月24日 更新

Build one compact choice card at a genuine mathematical-modeling judgment point. Use before method screening, after a meaningful experiment, or before final claim/freeze approval so the human chooses the trade-off while AI handles mechanical consequences.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills10602026年9月24日 更新

Plan the smallest set of diagnostic, comparison, paper, and appendix figures or tables needed to support verified mathematical-modeling decisions and claims.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills10602026年9月24日 更新

Build the authoritative final method explanation for a submission-ready subquestion from the method card, human decision ledger, code plan, final results, and robustness evidence.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills10602026年9月24日 更新

查看 zhnnky329 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题