Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

quality-gate

Check a paper's numerical claims against saved analysis outputs before submission. Receive a report identifying verified figures, unsupported claims, missing files, unreferenced outputs, and citation keys absent from the bibliography, without changing the manuscript.

OriginalShow the original description

Verify that every quantitative claim in the paper is traceable to an analysis output file, and that no important output was omitted. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants to check that the paper and analysis are consistent before submission. Triggers include: "run the quality gate", "check the paper matches the analysis", "verify consistency", "does the paper match my results", "check my numbers", "are my tables right", "quality check before submission", "verify my claims", "make sure everything is consistent", "double-check the paper against my output files", or any pre-submission integrity check between paper text and computed results.

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Good for

  • Check manuscript numbers before submission
  • Verify table and figure references against output files
  • Find analysis outputs not referenced in the paper
  • Detect citation keys missing from the bibliography

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md5.3 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Quality Gate: Paper ↔ Analysis Consistency

Cross-check every numerical claim in the paper against analysis output files. Reports only — never edits.

Input: $ARGUMENTS — path to the paper draft, or leave blank to auto-detect.


Step 1: Locate the Paper Draft

If $ARGUMENTS is provided, use that path. Otherwise glob for:

  • manuscripts/**/*.tex
  • manuscripts/**/*.qmd
  • manuscripts/**/*.md

If multiple drafts found, use AskUserQuestion to let the user pick:

  • header: "Paper"
  • question: "Multiple drafts found. Which manuscript should I check?"
  • options: list up to 4 found files (label: filename, description: path and file size). If more than 4, group by directory.

Step 2: Extract Numerical Claims

Read the full manuscript and extract every quantitative claim:

  • Coefficients and standard errors — e.g., "The effect is 0.23 (SE = 0.04)"
  • Sample sizes — e.g., "N = 4,521 observations"
  • Percentages and proportions — e.g., "42% of firms..."
  • Means, medians, ranges — e.g., "average income of $45,000"
  • Table and figure references — e.g., "Table 2 shows...", "as seen in Figure 1"
  • p-values and significance statements — e.g., "statistically significant at the 1% level"

Record location (section, paragraph, line number if available) for each claim.


Step 3: Inventory Output Files

Glob for all output files:

  • output/tables/**/*.tex — regression and summary tables
  • output/tables/**/*.html — HTML versions
  • output/figures/**/*.pdf, output/figures/**/*.png — figures
  • output/**/*.rds, output/**/*.pkl, output/**/*.parquet, output/**/*.csv — saved objects

Build an inventory with file paths and sizes.


Step 4: Dispatch Verifier Agent

Dispatch the verifier agent via Task to perform the heavy verification work. Pass it:

  • The full list of numerical claims extracted in Step 2 (with locations)
  • The output file inventory from Step 3
  • The paper draft path
  • The bibliography file path
Task prompt: "You are the verifier agent. Paper draft: [path].
Bibliography: [bib path].

CLAIMS TO VERIFY:
[paste the full claims list from Step 2]

OUTPUT FILE INVENTORY:
[paste the inventory from Step 3]

Verify each claim against the output files. Then do a reverse check —
find output files NOT referenced in the paper. Then check all citation
keys against the bibliography. Follow the verifier agent instructions
and return your full verification report."

After the verifier completes, collect its results:

  • Claim verification table (MATCHED / UNVERIFIED / MISSING FILE per claim)
  • Unreferenced output files list
  • Missing citation keys

Step 5: Save Report

Save to quality_reports/quality_gate_[YYYY-MM-DD]_[paper-name].md:

# Quality Gate Report: [Paper Name]
**Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Paper:** [file path]

## Verdict: PASS / CONDITIONAL PASS / FAIL

PASS = all claims matched, no missing citations, no unexplained unreferenced outputs
CONDITIONAL PASS = minor unverified claims or informational unreferenced outputs
FAIL = unverified critical claims or missing citations

---

## Claim Verification

| Claim | Location | Found in Output? | Source File | Status |
|-------|----------|-----------------|-------------|--------|
| β = 0.23 (SE = 0.04) | Section 4, para 2 | Yes | output/tables/main_regs.tex | MATCHED |
| N = 4,521 | Table 2 note | Yes | output/tables/main_regs.tex | MATCHED |
| 42% of firms | Intro, para 1 | No | — | UNVERIFIED |

---

## Unreferenced Outputs

Files in output/ not referenced in the paper:

| File | Size | Recommended Action |
|------|------|-------------------|
| output/tables/robustness_het.tex | 4.2 KB | Reference in Section 7 or explain exclusion |

---

## Missing Citations

| Key | Used At | Status |
|-----|---------|--------|
| SmithJones2021 | Section 3, para 1 | NOT IN BIBLIOGRAPHY — CRITICAL |

---

## Summary

- Claims verified: N / M total
- Claims unverified: K (see table above)
- Unreferenced outputs: J
- Missing citations: L

## Recommended Actions (Priority Order)
1. [BLOCKING] ...
2. [RECOMMENDED] ...

Key Rules

  • Report only — never edit. All fixes are the user's responsibility after reviewing the report.
  • Tolerance: For inline numbers, a claim is MATCHED if the value appears in any output file within reasonable display rounding (±0.005 for 2-decimal numbers).
  • False positives are OK. Flag uncertainties as UNVERIFIED rather than guessing MATCHED.
  • Missing files are always BLOCKING — a figure reference pointing to a non-existent file is a FAIL.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

a1

FreeSummary

Turn a broad research idea into clear, testable questions. Compare familiar and less conventional approaches, structure the selected question around its population and methods, and assess variables, feasibility, and potential theoretical contributions.

  • Turn a research topic into testable questions
  • Narrow an overly broad research question
  • Compare alternative research angles
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

a2

FreeSummary

Helps build a research framework by comparing theories, mapping relationships between variables, and deriving testable hypotheses. Explores less conventional options, examines weaknesses and competing explanations, and produces diagrams with anticipated reviewer objections.

  • Comparing theories for a research question
  • Deriving hypotheses from relationships between variables
  • Examining weaknesses and anticipated reviewer objections
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

a5

FreeSummary

Clarify the philosophical assumptions behind a research project and check whether they fit the proposed methods. Get a reasoned research stance, draft proposal wording, and guidance for explaining how the researcher's background and values shape the study.

  • Clarifying philosophical foundations for a research proposal
  • Explaining why the chosen research methods fit the study
  • Drafting a statement about the researcher's position
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

academic-paper

FreeSummary

Plan and draft academic papers through specialized agent roles covering literature, arguments, citations, and review. Get chapter guidance, revision roadmaps, Traditional Chinese and English abstracts, and documents formatted as LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.

  • Planning a paper chapter by chapter
  • Drafting a paper from research materials
  • Turning reviewer comments into a revision roadmap
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

Turn a detailed outline into a philosophy or interdisciplinary manuscript. Draft chapters with repeated quality reviews, check terminology and arguments across sections, and prepare the manuscript, evaluation reports, abstract, and metadata for submission.

  • Draft a full paper from a detailed outline
  • Review argument and citation quality chapter by chapter
  • Check terminology and argument flow across chapters
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.

  • Review a manuscript before journal submission
  • Examine research methods and statistical validity
  • Challenge core arguments and alternative explanations
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

See all skills by brycewang-stanford

Report a problem with this skill