fcr-reporting-and-data-policy — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited fcr-reporting-and-data-policy (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
FCR does not just want results — it wants the agronomic context that makes them interpretable and reproducible, plus a statement of data availability at submission. Build these as you go so they do not stall the submission.
A field-crop paper is reproducible only if the methods report all of:
fcr-data-analysis)submission**; the statement is published with the article on ScienceDirect.
domain repository) and cite it with a persistent identifier; FCR datasets are hosted openly under Creative Commons terms on Mendeley Data.
provider-restricted) in the data-availability statement during submission.
MethodsX alongside the article.
submission, per Elsevier policy.
interests, funding) where applicable.
A methods reviewer for a field-crop journal reads for reproducibility line by line. The gaps that draw "cannot evaluate" comments are predictable; carry this table so each item is on the page, not in a lab notebook.
| Block | Must report | Why FCR cares |
|---|---|---|
| Genotype | cultivar name, maturity group, seed source/year | G×E claims need genotype identity |
| Environment | site coordinates, elevation, seasons, what each environment represents | defines the target population of environments |
| Soil | classification, texture, depth, pH, organic C, available N/P/K | yield response is soil-conditional |
| Weather | radiation, max/min temperature, rainfall, aligned to phenology | lets readers interpret G×E |
| Management | sowing date/density, N/P/K rate and timing, irrigation, crop protection, tillage | the "M" in G×E×M |
| Design | layout, randomization, replication, plot size, guard rows | error structure depends on it |
Illustrative; figures are for demonstration only. A multi-environment trial of two wheat cultivars across 3 seasons × 5 sites (15 site-years) reports grain yields of 4.2–7.8 t ha⁻¹ and a per-plot dataset of N rate, anthesis date, and yield. Drafting the statement: the plot-level table (15 site-years × 4 N rates × 3 reps ≈ 180 rows) is non-sensitive, so deposit it in Mendeley Data under Creative Commons, cite it with the DOI, and state "data are openly available at [DOI]." One site's soil-survey layer is licensed from a provider that forbids redistribution — for that layer only, state the restriction and its reason rather than leaving a blanket "available on request." The published statement must let a reader regenerate every yield mean and SED in the results. Check the repository and statement wording against the journal's author guidelines during the final upload-week pass.
【Reporting complete?】cultivar + site/season + soil + weather-vs-phenology + management + design + stats? [Y/N]
【Yield data linked to process?】[Y/N]
【Data-availability statement】shared (repo + ID) / restricted (reason) — drafted? [Y/N]
【Co-submission】Data in Brief / MethodsX relevant? [Y/N/NA]
【Generative-AI declaration】[Y/N/NA]
【Next】fcr-writing-style../../resources/external_tools.md — data repositories and reproducibility tooling../../resources/official-source-map.md — data-availability, AI-disclosure, and reporting policy~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.