Evidence Draft

What the source does

• FilesystemNone observedNo reads or writes in the source
• NetworkNone observedNo outbound calls in the source
• ShellNone observedNo commands run in the source
• DependenciesPinnedNothing floats
• SecretsNone foundNo keys in source

Five audit layers

Gates applied: no behavioural pass, no license.

.claude/skills

Audit 0.4.1 · source sha 81994516a430 · 19 Oct 2026Report an issue or request a re-scan

• PublisherWILLOSCAR GitHub userOwner of the repository this skill is read from
• Source folderWILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills/.codex/skills/evidence-draftThe exact folder we audited
• LicenceNot declaredAs the repository states it
• Commit pinned for this verdict81994516a430A new audit runs when the source changes
• Repository statusNot archivedLast push 14 days ago
• Sandboxed runNot runSkills are read, not executed; layer L4 is skipped

Its description: Create per-subsection evidence packs (NO PROSE): claim candidates, concrete comparisons, evaluation protocol, limitations, plus citation-backed evidence snippets with provenance.

---
name: evidence-draft
description: "Create per-subsection evidence packs (NO PROSE): claim candidates, concrete comparisons, evaluation protocol, limitations, plus citation-backed evidence snippets with provenance."
---

# Evidence Draft

## Triggers & routing

- **Trigger**: evidence draft, evidence pack, claim candidates, concrete comparisons, evidence snippets, provenance, 证据草稿, 证据包, 可引用事实.


Build deterministic `outline/evidence_drafts.jsonl` packs from briefs + notes + optional evidence bindings.

Compatibility mode is active: this migration preserves the existing JSONL contract while moving evidence-quality policy, sparse-evidence routing, and evaluation-anchor rules into `references/` and `assets/`.

## Load Order

Always read:
- `references/overview.md`
- `references/evidence_quality_policy.md`

Read by task:
- `references/block_vs_downgrade.md` when deciding whether thin evidence should block drafting or only downgrade claim strength
- `references/evaluation_anchor_rules.md` when evaluation tokens, protocol context, or numeric claims are weak
- `references/examples_sparse_evidence.md` for evidence-thin pack calibration
- `references/source_text_hygiene.md` when paper self-narration or generic result wrappers are leaking into pack snippets / claim candidates

Machine-readable assets:
- `assets/evidence_pack_schema.json`
- `assets/evidence_policy.json`
- `assets/source_text_hygiene.json`
- repo-wide `assets/limitation-signals.json` — shared polarity rules that keep
  resolved failures and positive improvements out of limitation slots

## Inputs

Required:
- `outline/subsection_briefs.jsonl`
- `papers/paper_notes.jsonl`
- `citations/ref.bib`

Optional but recommended:
- `papers/evidence_bank.jsonl`
- `outline/evidence_bindings.jsonl`

## Outputs

Keep the current output contract:
- `outline/evidence_drafts.jsonl`
- optional human-readable mirrors under `outline/evidence_drafts/`

## Script Boundary

Use `scripts/run.py` only for:
- deterministic joins across briefs / notes / evidence bank / bindings
- snippet extraction and provenance assembly
- policy-driven `blocking_missing` / `downgrade_signals` / `verify_fields` materialization
- pack validation and Markdown mirror generation

Do not treat `run.py` as the place for:
- filler bullets that make thin evidence look complete
- hidden sparse-evidence judgment that is not inspectable from `references/` / `assets/`
- reader-facing narrative prose

## Output Shape Rules

Keep these stable:
- preserve the existing top-level pack fields already used by downstream survey pipelines
- `claim_candidates` must remain snippet-derived
- `concrete_comparisons` must remain genuinely two-sided; if one cluster has no usable highlight, drop the card and surface thin evidence upstream instead of fabricating an A-vs-B contrast
- snippet sampling should stay cluster-aware: when a subsection has explicit clusters, evidence selection should avoid collapsing onto one route just because its abstracts contain louder result sentences
- sparse evidence should surface as explicit blockers / downgrade signals / verify fields, not filler bullets
- citation keys must remain constrained to `citations/ref.bib`

## Compatibility Notes

Current mode is reference-first with deterministic compatibility:
- `assets/evidence_policy.json` defines pack thresholds and sparse-evidence routing
- `assets/evidence_pack_schema.json` documents/validates the stable pack shape
- `assets/source_text_hygiene.json` owns this Skill's wrapper cleanup, while the
  repo-wide `assets/limitation-signals.json` owns limitation polarity across
  `paper-notes`, `evidence-draft`, and `writer-context-pack`
- `scripts/run.py` still materializes the existing JSONL + Markdown outputs, but no longer pads sparse sections with generic caution prose

## Quick Start

- `uv run python .codex/skills/evidence-draft/scripts/run.py --workspace <workspace>`

## Execution Notes

When running in compatibility mode, `scripts/run.py` currently reads:
- `outline/subsection_briefs.jsonl`
- `papers/paper_notes.jsonl`
- `citations/ref.bib`
- optionally `papers/evidence_bank.jsonl` and `outline/evidence_bindings.jsonl`
- `assets/evidence_policy.json` and `assets/evidence_pack_schema.json`

## Script

### Quick Start

- `uv run python .codex/skills/evidence-draft/scripts/run.py --workspace <workspace>`

### All Options

- `--workspace <dir>`
- `--unit-id <id>`
- `--inputs <path1;path2>`
- `--outputs <path1;path2>`
- `--checkpoint <C*>`

### Examples

- `uv run python .codex/skills/evidence-draft/scripts/run.py --workspace <workspace>`

## Troubleshooting

- If packs look complete despite thin evidence, inspect `assets/evidence_policy.json` and `references/block_vs_downgrade.md` before changing Python.
- If evaluation bullets are generic, inspect `references/evaluation_anchor_rules.md` and the policy asset.
- If claims are strong but evidence is abstract/title-only, downgrade via `downgrade_signals` and `verify_fields` rather than adding narrative caveats.

Excerpt, first 5,018 characters of SKILL.md, verbatim from the audited commit. It is text from someone else’s repository, quoted so you can judge it before your agent reads it.

1. 2026-10-19
   ✓SAFE B 89 / 100

   first audit · source 81994516a430

Questions about Evidence Draft

• github.com/WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills/tree/main/.c — the audited source at commit 81994516a430 and every finding aboveObserved · 19 Oct 2026

Spotted something wrong? Report a correction · Methodology