research-architect-audit-918ac1 — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited research-architect-audit-918ac1 (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.
Use this branch before declaring the first draft complete.
Read all available artifacts under:
paper_output/Especially:
project_config.json
exemplar_logic_profile.md
exemplar_adaptation_plan.md
confirmed_research_spine.md
study_design_brief.md
study_component_registry.md
evidence_bank.md
claim_register.md
evidence_display_map.md
citation_support_bank.md
section_blueprints.md
writing_rationale_matrix.md
first_draft/main.mdUse compatible legacy artifacts when the canonical file is absent.
Create:
paper_output/audit_report.md
paper_output/revision_queue.md| Gate | Blocking Failure Examples |
|---|---|
| Target-reference logic | target paper summarized without extracting load-bearing research moves or strengths |
| Adaptation validity | topic nouns changed while design assumptions, context, or evidence needs remain unexamined |
| Research spine clarity | no bounded phenomenon/tension/question/contribution/scope |
| Feasibility | claim depends on evidence, access, participants, sources, or warrants that are unavailable and unplanned |
| Literature grounding | sources are listed without mapping concepts, theories, debates, methods, evidence standards, or gaps |
| Design-family fit | validity criteria or manuscript logic come from an incompatible research tradition |
| Study-design validity | selection, evidence generation, analysis, comparison/warrant, credibility, or inference boundary is missing |
| Evidence traceability | central claims lack evidence IDs, citation IDs, locators, or explicit limitation language |
| Evidence-display logic | display has no argument function, hides context, or states a stronger claim than the evidence permits |
| Citation integrity | citation is invented, unverifiable, irrelevant, or used beyond its support |
| Non-copying | wording, source-specific claims, data, display content, or rhetorical sequence is too close to the exemplar |
| Draft completeness | the design family requires methods, positionality, source criticism, integration, counterargument, limitations, or findings that are absent |
| Inference-boundary control | causal, prevalence, transfer, theoretical, normative, mechanistic, or policy claims exceed the available warrant |
| Gate | Status | Evidence Checked | Problem Found | Required Fix | Upstream Owner | Severity |
|---|
Severity values:
BLOCKED: required before the draft can be used;MAJOR: weakens the central research logic or claim;MINOR: improves clarity, transparency, or presentation;PASS: no issue found.| Priority | Fix | Affected Section | Required Upstream Artifact | Owner/Next Action | Verification Criterion |
|---|
research-architect-literature.research-architect-literature or research-architect-brainstorm.research-architect-design.research-architect-evidence.research-architect-citation.~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.