**Overall Verdict:** Strong Accept — The revision is complete, coherent, securely evaluable, and provides a reproducible end-to-end implementation task with objective acceptance criteria.

**Completeness Check:**
- Instruction: Complete — the task card, model contract, numerical contract, and coaching notes define all three commands, equations, units, numerical conventions, output schemas, and feasibility conditions.
- Inputs: Complete — the input archive contains readable athlete cards, constraints, a valid 4,580-row CSV session, an 844-point GPX course, notes, and an unencrypted 17-page background paper.
- Toolchain: Complete — Python 3.12 and NumPy 2.0.2 are legally obtainable, Linux-compatible, and sufficient; the reference implementation itself uses only Python’s standard library.
- Reference output: Complete — runnable reference code, all four expected public artifacts, protected fixtures, frozen expected values, and replay modules are present.
- Rubric: Complete — hard gates, determinism checks, numeric tolerances, hidden slices, feasibility replay, event-label checks, time baselines, and the binary 0.27 threshold are explicit and implemented consistently.

**File and Task Reachability:**
The attachment classification is `reachable`, and the end-to-end task classification is `reachable`. Both `mader_metabolic_pipeline_input_v3.zip` and `mader_metabolic_pipeline_reference_eval_v3.zip` matched their declared sizes, were valid unencrypted ZIP files, passed integrity checks, and contained no traversal paths, links, device entries, or unsafe expansion. Every member was inspected, including the public contracts, notes, JSON cards, CSV, GPX, PDF, task card, provenance and README files; the reference pipeline and helper modules; evaluator, scoring, isolation, and reward code; protected specifications, expected values, fixtures, courses, and public output artifacts. The CSV effort means match the fixed windows, GPX distances and plan timing are internally consistent, JSON files parse, and the PDF contains no JavaScript or embedded files. No content was left unreviewed, and no material tooling limitation affected the assessment. Solver-visible inputs and evaluator-only references are separated, while the evaluator verifies that protected files cannot be read by candidate processes before execution. An ordinary contributor can implement the pipeline on one CPU machine, produce the required artifacts, and be evaluated objectively. 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

**Recommended Changes:**
The revision already provides unusually precise public numerical contracts, realistic cross-stage implementation work, protected generalization cases, and independent full-course replay. No changes are required.