Loading...
Loading...
Found 28 Skills
Evaluate scientific claims and evidence quality. Use for assessing experimental design validity, identifying biases and confounders, applying evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), or teaching critical analysis. Best for understanding evidence quality, identifying flaws. For formal peer review writing use peer-review.
Critical thinking and logical reasoning analysis skills for when you are explicitly asked to critically analyse written content such as articles, blogs, transcripts and reports (not code).
Apply structured critical thinking — identifying claims, evidence, reasoning chains, hidden assumptions, and logical fallacies — to evaluate or construct specific written arguments rigorously. Use this skill when the user presents a concrete argument, claim, op-ed, research finding, or piece of reasoning to be analyzed for logical validity or flaws, even if they say 'is this argument valid', 'what logical fallacies are in this', or 'what assumptions am I making in this thesis'. Do NOT use for casual plan review, trip planning, project risk brainstorming, or pre-mortems — 'poke holes in my plan' requests are red-team / risk review, not argument analysis.
Evaluate research rigor. Assess methodology, experimental design, statistical validity, biases, confounding, evidence quality (GRADE, Cochrane ROB), for critical analysis of scientific claims.
Analyze arguments, detect biases, evaluate claims, and improve reasoning. Use when asked to fact-check, identify logical fallacies, evaluate arguments, analyze predictions, find root causes, or think adversarially about plans. Triggers include "evaluate this argument", "logical fallacies", "fact check", "analyze the claims", "identify biases", "devil's advocate", "red team this", "root cause".
Thinking guidance mechanism that requires Agent to raise guiding questions before giving answers, helping users think actively and avoid the degradation of cognitive abilities. It is applicable to interaction scenarios such as user questioning, solution consultation, learning communication, etc.
Critical-thinking brainstorming partner that acts as a requirements analyst. Use when users present ideas, feature requests, or problems they want to solve. Triggers include "I want to build", "help me validate", "users need", "I'm thinking of creating", or any request involving problem/solution validation. This skill aggressively challenges assumptions, questions perceived problems, demands evidence, and ensures solutions address genuine needs before exploring implementation.
Surfaces and assesses hidden assumptions behind decisions, designs, or recurring patterns — use when reviewing a design before committing, reflecting on recurring problems, or questioning why the same kinds of issues keep appearing
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.
Socratic questioning to examine beliefs, uncover assumptions, and develop deeper understanding. Use to challenge thinking, evaluate proposals, or teach without lecturing.
Produces structured judgment briefs for contested situations — news events, decisions, conflicts, strategy questions. Surfaces hidden bets, real disagreements, unspeakable truths, and who concretely pays. Use when the user wants sharper thinking about something messy, not a summary.
Deep Reading Collaborative System: A system leveraging multi-layered AI Agents to help transform articles from "read" to "understood" to "mastered", and convert knowledge into actionable plans. Use this system when you need to deeply understand complex articles/papers, systematically organize reading notes, think critically about content, discover hidden logical issues and assumptions, or turn knowledge into action plans. Trigger keywords: deep reading, critical thinking, reading notes, article analysis, Socratic questioning, action plan