You are required to act as an answer evaluator. Given an issue context, the hint disclosed to the agent and the answer from the agent, 
you should rate the performance of the agent into three levels: "failed", "partially", and "success". The rating rules are as follows:

<rules>
1. You will be given a list of <metrics>, for each metric, you should rate in [0,1] for the agent based on the metric criteria, and then multiply the rating by the weight of the metric.
2. If the sum of the ratings is less than 0.45, then the agent is rated as "failed"; if the sum of the ratings is greater than or equal to 0.45 and less than 0.85, then the agent is rated as "partially"; if the sum of the ratings is greater than or equal to 0.85, then the agent is rated as "success".
3. **<text>** means the text is important and should be paid attention to.
4. ****<text>**** means the text is the most important and should be paid attention to.
</rules>

The <metrics> are as follows:
{
    "m1": {
        "criteria": "Precise Contextual Evidence:
            1. The agent must accurately identify and focus on the specific issue mentioned in the context. This involves a close examination of the exact evidence given and determining whether it aligns with the content described in the issue and the involved files.
            2. Always ask yourself: Have the agent provided correct and detailed context evidence to support its finding of issues? If the agent just gives some general description without specifically pointing out where the issues occur, you should give it a low rate.
            3. Once the agent has correctly spotted **** all the issues in <issue> and provided accurate context evidence ****, it should be given a ****full score (1.0) even if it includes other unrelated issues/examples ****"
            4. If the agent has only spotted part of the issues with the relevant context in <issue>, then you should give a medium rate.
            5. The expression in the answer of the agent might not directly pinpoint the issue, but when its answer implies the existence of the <issue> and has provided correct evidence context, then it should be given a high rate for m1.
            6. For issues about something missing and having no clear location information, even if there is context in <issue> involved files, it's ok for the agent to only give an issue description without pointing out where the issue occurs in detail."
         "weight": 0.8,
        "range": [0, 1]
    },
    "m2": {
        "criteria": "Detailed Issue Analysis: 
            1. The agent must provide a detailed analysis of the issue, showing an understanding of how this specific issue could impact the overall task or dataset as human evaluators do.
            2. This metric stresses the importance of not just identifying that there is an issue but also understanding and explaining its implications in detail, rather than simply repeating the information in hint.",
        "weight": 0.15,
        "range": [0, 1]
    },
    "m3": {
        "criteria": "Relevance of Reasoning: 
            1. The agent’s reasoning should directly relate to the specific issue mentioned, highlighting the potential consequences or impacts.
            2. This metric ensures that the agent’s logical reasoning directly applies to the problem at hand, rather than being a generic statement.",
        "weight": 0.05,
        "range": [0, 1]
    }
}
</metrics>

--------------------------------

Now let’s begin:

<issue>
title: Bad ARN format for ClinVar dataset
content: The clinvar study has a malformed ARN:

open-data-registry/datasets/clinvar.yaml

Line 17 in 945edf1

 ARN: s3://aws-roda-hcls-datalake/clinvar_summary_variants/ 
I'd expect it to be arn:aws:s3:::aws-roda-hcls-datalake/clinvar_summary_variants/

I think that this is also breaking the website at https://registry.opendata.aws/clinvar/. There's an undefined in the AWS CLI command

AWS CLI Access (No AWS account required)
    aws s3 ls s3://undefined/ --no-sign-request
btw, Is there validation in place to prevent this kind of malformed data from being published? I see that there is a schema file with a regex for ARN, but somehow this bad ARN ended up being published
open-data-registry/schema.yaml

Lines 70 to 72 in 95a8388

 ARN: 
   type: str 
   pattern: ^arn:aws|aws-iso:.+:.*:.*:.+$ 
I'm working on https://github.com/awslabs/service-workbench-on-aws and we consume the open data files. This bad ARN caught by surprise and is causing bugs. We are thinking on adding extra validation on our side but it's probably best for all your clients if you validate ARNs on your side.
involved: [
    {
        "name": "clinvar.yaml",
        "context": "
ARN: s3://aws-roda-hcls-datalake/clinvar_summary_variants/ "
    },
    {
        "name": "README.md",
        "context": "Resources > ARNtStringtAmazon Resource Name for resource, e.g. arn:aws:s3:::commoncrawl

and in ### Example entry, it provides some examples of valid ARN strings:
Resources:
  - Description: NEXRAD Level II archive data
    ARN: arn:aws:s3:::noaa-nexrad-level2
    Region: us-east-1
    Type: S3 Bucket
    Explore:
    - '[Browse Bucket](https://noaa-nexrad-level2.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html)'
  - Description: NEXRAD Level II real-time data
    ARN: arn:aws:s3:::unidata-nexrad-level2-chunks
    Region: us-east-1
    Type: S3 Bucket
  - Description: "[Rich notifications](https://github.com/awslabs/open-data-docs/tree/main/docs/noaa/noaa-nexrad#subscribing-to-nexrad-data-notifications) for real-time data with filterable fields"
    ARN: arn:aws:sns:us-east-1:684042711724:NewNEXRADLevel2ObjectFilterable
    Region: us-east-1
    Type: SNS Topic
  - Description: Notifications for archival data
    ARN: arn:aws:sns:us-east-1:811054952067:NewNEXRADLevel2Archive
    Region: us-east-1
    Type: SNS Topic"
    }
]
</issue>

<hint>
None
</hint>

-------------------- Below is the answer from the agent. Ensure you don’t take the information above as the agent’s answer!

<answer>
Here are the identified issues from the provided `clinvar.yaml` and `README.md` files:

### Issue 1: Incorrect Resource Description in `clinvar.yaml`
**Evidence:**
```yaml
Resources:
  - Description: ClinVar
    ARN: s3://aws-roda-hcls-datalake/clinvar_summary_variants/
    Region: us-east-1
    Type: S3 Bucket
```

**Description:**
The description of the resource in the `clinvar.yaml` file is generic and does not provide specific details about the resource. It should contain more detailed information about what the resource contains or how it should be used.

### Issue 2: Incomplete Contributor Guidelines in `README.md`
**Evidence:**
```markdown
## How can I contribute?

You are welcome to contribute dataset entries or usage examples to the Registry of Open Data on AWS. Please review our [contribution guidelines](CONTRIBUTING.md). 
```

**Description:**
The contributor guidelines section in the `README.md` file is incomplete. It should provide more detailed instructions or a summary of the key points from the `CONTRIBUTING.md` file, ensuring contributors have a clear understanding of how to contribute without needing to refer to another document.

### Issue 3: Broken Documentation Links in `clinvar.yaml`
**Evidence:**
```yaml
Documentation: https://github.com/aws-samples/data-lake-as-code/blob/roda/docs/roda_install.md
License: https://github.com/aws-samples/data-lake-as-code/blob/roda/docs/roda_attributions.txt
```

**Description:**
The links provided for documentation and license in the `clinvar.yaml` file appear to be outdated or broken. These should be verified and updated to ensure users can access the correct documentation and license information.

### Issue 4: Missing Update Frequency Details in `clinvar.yaml`
**Evidence:**
```yaml
UpdateFrequency: Every Sunday at 1AM UTC
```

**Description:**
The `UpdateFrequency` field in the `clinvar.yaml` file states the update time but lacks details about what aspects are updated. It should specify what data or resources are being updated and any relevant considerations for users.

### Issue 5: Insufficient Information about `DataAtWork` Tutorials in `clinvar.yaml`
**Evidence:**
```yaml
DataAtWork:
  Tutorials:
    - Title: Data Lake as Code Deployment Guide
      URL: https://github.com/aws-samples/data-lake-as-code/blob/roda/docs/roda_install.md
      AuthorName: AWS Biotech Blueprints Team
      Services:
        - Athena
        - Glue
        - Lake Form
```

**Description:**
The tutorials section under `DataAtWork` in the `clinvar.yaml` file lacks detailed descriptions of each tutorial. It should include a brief summary or key points covered in each tutorial to give users a better understanding of their content.

By addressing these issues, the dataset documentation will be more comprehensive and user-friendly, ensuring better clarity and usability for users.
</answer>

-------------------- 

response below, 
1. after your analysis, remember to give a **"decision: [failed/partially/success]"** for me to extract it using REGEX.
2. Don't use Code Interpreter!; Use your ability to analyze the text.  ** Pay attention to your calculations and make sure they are correct. **
3. There could be multiple issues described in <issue> part. You should start by thinking clearly about how many issues exist in <issue> and list them out, then you should compare them with the answer from the agent.
4. you should focus on whether the agent has spotted the issue in <issue> rather than caring about whether the agent includes unrelated examples not present in the context.
