eda-theory-veto

Evaluate EDA experiment proposals and issue GO, CONDITIONAL, or NO-GO verdicts.

8|3|Updated Mar 6, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Mr-Fang-VLSI/EDAgent --skill eda-theory-veto
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: eda-theory-veto
Source: https://github.com/Mr-Fang-VLSI/EDAgent/tree/main/skills/eda-theory-veto
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Mr-Fang-VLSI/EDAgent --skill eda-theory-veto

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill evaluates proposed EDA experiments and flow changes to detect logically unsound assumptions, conflicts with known physics or policy, and high-risk comparisons before any expensive submission is run, preventing wasted resources and invalid results.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Theory-based vetoing: Parse a one-paragraph proposal into falsifiable assumptions and check them against physics, EDA constraints, local policy, and empirical evidence.
  • Structured verdicts: Emit a single GO / CONDITIONAL / NO-GO verdict with numbered blocking reasons, an assumption table, and a minimal corrective experiment when needed.
  • Enforcement integration: Produce machine-readable reports consumable by gate scripts to block or allow submissions and record override logs for audits.
  • Use Case: Run this before launching large simulation batches, changing cost or objective models, or claiming algorithmic superiority to avoid invalid comparisons or policy violations.

Quick Start

Use the eda-theory-veto skill to evaluate my proposed experiment and return a GO, CONDITIONAL, or NO-GO verdict with evidence and a safe next step.

Frequently Asked Questions about eda-theory-veto

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I prevent theoretically unsound EDA experiments before running costly simulation batches?

To prevent theoretically unsound EDA experiments, evaluate proposals by parsing assumptions against physics, EDA constraints, and local policy to block unsafe submissions before running costly simulation batches.

What is a GO or NO-GO decision gating process for EDA layout and routing flow changes?

A GO or NO-GO decision gating process for EDA layout and routing evaluates proposed flow changes, returning a structured verdict with numbered blocking reasons, an assumption table, and a safe next step.

How do I validate falsifiable assumptions for algorithmic comparisons in EDA?

To validate falsifiable assumptions for algorithmic comparisons in EDA, parse your one-paragraph proposal to detect logical conflicts with known physics or policy and produce a structured GO, CONDITIONAL, or NO-GO verdict.

Can I integrate EDA experiment risk assessment with automated gate scripts?

Yes, you can integrate EDA experiment risk assessment with automated gate scripts by generating machine-readable reports that block or allow submissions and record override logs for audits.

When do I need an experiment safety veto for major PDN or CTS model changes?

You need an experiment safety veto for major PDN or CTS model changes when detecting high-risk comparisons, preventing invalid results and wasted resources before any expensive submission is run.

What are the limitations of theory-based vetoing for EDA proposals?

Theory-based vetoing for EDA proposals relies on local KB veto criteria and empirical evidence, meaning its effectiveness is constrained by the completeness and accuracy of the referenced knowledge base.