"""PoC quality evaluation prompts."""

POC_EVAL_PROMPT = """[Task]
You are evaluating the quality of a proof-of-concept (PoC) script generated for a specific vulnerability.

[Vulnerability Information]
CVE ID: {cve}
Description: {cve_desc}
CWE Type: {cwe}

[Vulnerable Code]
```c
{vuln_func}
```

[Generated PoC Script]
```python
{poc}
```

[Evaluation Criteria]
Rate the PoC on the following six dimensions. Each dimension is scored 1-5. The total score is the sum of all six dimensions (max 30).

1. **Relevance** (1-5): Does the PoC target the specific vulnerability described by the CVE? Is it aligned with the vulnerability mechanism shown in the code?

2. **Exploitability** (1-5): Can the PoC realistically trigger the vulnerability? Does it construct valid inputs that reach the vulnerable code path?

3. **Completeness** (1-5): Is the PoC a self-contained, independently executable script?

   Scoring rules for Completeness:
   - 1-2 points: The code is merely raw data/payload (e.g., `b"A"*1000`, a byte string, or pseudocode) without any execution context. It lacks network sending, function invocation, or a runnable entry point.
   - 3 points: The code has some structure (e.g., imports, function definitions) but is missing critical execution components (no socket.send, no main function call, no actual trigger).
   - 4-5 points: The code is a fully self-contained script that includes environment setup (structs, imports, constants), payload construction, AND a trigger action (e.g., socket.send/recv, main() invoking the vulnerable function, or a complete network handshake).

4. **Precision** (1-5): Does the PoC target the exact flaw (e.g., the specific missing check, off-by-one, type confusion) rather than a generic attack?

5. **Safety** (1-5): Does the PoC avoid unnecessary destructive behavior beyond demonstrating the vulnerability?

6. **Correctness** (1-5): Is the PoC code syntactically correct and logically sound? Does it use proper data types, protocol structures, and encoding?

[Output Format]
Provide your analysis in the following structured format:

<analysis>
- Relevance: X/5 - brief justification
- Exploitability: X/5 - brief justification
- Completeness: X/5 - brief justification
- Precision: X/5 - brief justification
- Safety: X/5 - brief justification
- Correctness: X/5 - brief justification
</analysis>

<total_score>N</total_score>

Where N is an integer from 6 to 30 (sum of the six dimension scores).
"""