**Overall Verdict:** Accept — The submission is complete and objectively evaluable, with coherent inputs, matching checkers, and supplied evidence of feasible solutions for all ten hidden instances.

**Completeness Check:**

- Instruction: Complete — Defines the geometry, rigid-piece constraints, program interface, output schema, tolerances, and execution limits.
- Inputs: Complete — All three public and ten hidden input pairs parse successfully; units, clockwise boundaries, port adjacency, sampling, and parameters match the specification.
- Toolchain: Complete — Python 3.11, pinned open-source dependencies, matching dependency locks, and environment definitions are supplied.
- Reference output: Complete — Ten reference plans, result reports, execution logs, and reusable solver source are included. Independent structural checks found no inconsistencies.
- Rubric: Complete — Identical public and grading checkers implement the stated placement, motion, extraction, and area rules; scoring awards credit independently across ten cases.

**File and Task Reachability:**

Attachments: `reachable`. Both `input_materials.zip` and `reference_and_eval.zip` match their manifest byte counts and pass archive integrity checks. No encryption, unsafe paths, links, or excessive expansion were found. All 66 contained files are readable UTF-8 text.

Inspected content includes every `cavity.json`, `params.json`, `plan.json`, `result.json`, and `solve.log`, both `check.py` copies, both `requirements.lock` files, the Dockerfiles, `test_outputs.py`, `test.sh`, and reference `solve.py` and `solve.sh`. No relevant attachment content remains unreviewed.

Task: `reachable`. Public inputs support development; the packaged program is evaluated independently on protected hidden inputs using objective geometric checks. The required separation of hidden inputs and reference assets is explicit. Supplied reports record ten passes and solver runtimes below 15 seconds. Container builds and full motion-check results were not independently reproduced; uploaded code was inspected without execution.

License keys, accounts, tokens, and other credentials are not required from the contributor. Confidential, proprietary, or internal material may be evaluated as submitted evidence without requiring additional disclosure.

**Special Screening:**

None. No affirmative evidence supports a policy screening label. Public-benchmark provenance could not be independently checked because approved search was unavailable.

**Recommended Changes:**

The precise output contract, matching checkers, protected evaluation assets, and complete reference evidence support readiness. No contributor changes are required.