Backside Benefit Attribution Evaluator
Evaluate whether backside benefits come from `CTS-backside-only` or from moving a selected subset of signal nets to backside, under a fair and physically valid comparison contract.
Install
$ agentstack add skill-mr-fang-vlsi-edagent-backside-benefit-attribution-evaluator ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Links to your public security report.[](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-mr-fang-vlsi-edagent-backside-benefit-attribution-evaluator) Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Backside Benefit Attribution Evaluator
Use this skill when the question is "what caused the benefit?" not merely "which arm won?"
When to use
Use this skill when:
front-only,CTS-backside-only, andpartial-signal-backsideneed fair comparison,- a run shows a PPA difference but attribution is unclear,
- backside usage must be evidenced directly rather than inferred from PPA alone,
- the paper narrative needs a controlled mechanism claim.
Scope boundary
This skill owns:
- benefit attribution across the canonical three-arm ladder,
- fairness checking for the comparison contract,
- deciding whether an observed delta is likely meaningful, weak, confounded, or unproven.
It does not own:
- the physical contract itself without
bspdn-physical-contract-auditor, - the PDN sufficiency question without
bspdn-pdn-sufficiency-evaluator, - full batch orchestration.
Canonical arms
front-onlyCTS-backside-onlypartial-signal-backside
Required evidence
For any claim, require:
- fair route-window contract
- direct backside usage evidence
- comparable stage/restart baseline
- PPA deltas with stated axis and direction
Expected outputs
*.results.tsv*.conclusion.md- optional
*.experience_delta.md
Hard rules
- Do not claim "backside signal helped" if the run has no direct backside occupancy evidence.
- Do not compare arms with mismatched routing contracts and then call the result mechanism evidence.
- Keep "no observable benefit" separate from "backside signal path disproved"; the latter requires stronger evidence.
- Promotion toward placement-algorithm claims requires repeated mechanism-consistent Arm C advantage, not one-off wins.
Operational references
- Load
references/background-knowledge-links.mdfor the current summarized attribution contract and its KB anchors. - Load
references/update-mechanism.mdwhen deciding whether the attribution criteria or baseline assumptions should be refreshed.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: Mr-Fang-VLSI
- Source: Mr-Fang-VLSI/EDAgent
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.