Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

subagent-driven-analysis

Use when executing a pre-registered analysis plan with mostly independent steps in the current session

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

See how to install

Files included (4)

  • SKILL.md7.8 KB
  • analyst-prompt.md2.3 KB
  • protocol-compliance-reviewer-prompt.md1.7 KB
  • rigor-reviewer-prompt.md2.0 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Subagent-Driven Analysis

Execute a pre-registered analysis plan by dispatching a fresh subagent per analysis step, with two-stage review after each: protocol-compliance review first (did it run exactly what was pre-registered, nothing more), then statistical-rigor review (assumptions, leakage, correctness, reproducibility).

Why subagents: You delegate steps to specialized agents with isolated context. By precisely crafting their instructions, you keep them focused and prevent them from improvising analyses you didn't pre-register. They never inherit your session's history — you construct exactly what they need. This also preserves your own context for coordination.

Core principle: Fresh subagent per step + two-stage review (protocol then rigor) = trustworthy, reproducible results.

Continuous execution: Do not pause to check in between steps. Execute the whole plan. The only reasons to stop: a BLOCKED status you cannot resolve, an anomaly that needs science-superpowers:investigating-anomalous-results, a genuine ambiguity, or all steps complete.

Prerequisite

The analysis plan MUST be pre-registered and frozen (science-superpowers:preregistering-analysis) before any step runs. If it is not frozen, stop and pre-register first. Executing before freezing turns the whole thing exploratory.

When to Use

digraph when_to_use {
    "Pre-registered plan?" [shape=diamond];
    "Steps mostly independent?" [shape=diamond];
    "Stay in this session?" [shape=diamond];
    "subagent-driven-analysis" [shape=box];
    "executing-analysis" [shape=box];
    "Pre-register first" [shape=box];

    "Pre-registered plan?" -> "Steps mostly independent?" [label="yes"];
    "Pre-registered plan?" -> "Pre-register first" [label="no"];
    "Steps mostly independent?" -> "Stay in this session?" [label="yes"];
    "Stay in this session?" -> "subagent-driven-analysis" [label="yes"];
    "Stay in this session?" -> "executing-analysis" [label="no - parallel session"];
}

The Process

digraph process {
    rankdir=TB;

    "Set up reproducible workspace" [shape=box];
    "Read plan + frozen prereg, extract all steps, create TodoWrite" [shape=box];
    "Dispatch analyst subagent (./analyst-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
    "Analyst asks questions?" [shape=diamond];
    "Answer, provide context" [shape=box];
    "Analyst runs step, validates, commits, self-reviews" [shape=box];
    "Dispatch protocol-compliance reviewer (./protocol-compliance-reviewer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
    "Ran exactly the pre-registered analysis?" [shape=diamond];
    "Analyst fixes deviations" [shape=box];
    "Dispatch rigor reviewer (./rigor-reviewer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
    "Rigor reviewer approves?" [shape=diamond];
    "Analyst fixes rigor issues" [shape=box];
    "Mark step complete" [shape=box];
    "More steps?" [shape=diamond];
    "Use requesting-red-team-review on whole result" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];
    "Use reporting-and-archiving-findings" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];

    "Set up reproducible workspace" -> "Read plan + frozen prereg, extract all steps, create TodoWrite";
    "Read plan + frozen prereg, extract all steps, create TodoWrite" -> "Dispatch analyst subagent (./analyst-prompt.md)";
    "Dispatch analyst subagent (./analyst-prompt.md)" -> "Analyst asks questions?";
    "Analyst asks questions?" -> "Answer, provide context" [label="yes"];
    "Answer, provide context" -> "Dispatch analyst subagent (./analyst-prompt.md)";
    "Analyst asks questions?" -> "Analyst runs step, validates, commits, self-reviews" [label="no"];
    "Analyst runs step, validates, commits, self-reviews" -> "Dispatch protocol-compliance reviewer (./protocol-compliance-reviewer-prompt.md)";
    "Dispatch protocol-compliance reviewer (./protocol-compliance-reviewer-prompt.md)" -> "Ran exactly the pre-registered analysis?";
    "Ran exactly the pre-registered analysis?" -> "Analyst fixes deviations" [label="no"];
    "Analyst fixes deviations" -> "Dispatch protocol-compliance reviewer (./protocol-compliance-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="re-review"];
    "Ran exactly the pre-registered analysis?" -> "Dispatch rigor reviewer (./rigor-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="yes"];
    "Dispatch rigor reviewer (./rigor-reviewer-prompt.md)" -> "Rigor reviewer approves?";
    "Rigor reviewer approves?" -> "Analyst fixes rigor issues" [label="no"];
    "Analyst fixes rigor issues" -> "Dispatch rigor reviewer (./rigor-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="re-review"];
    "Rigor reviewer approves?" -> "Mark step complete" [label="yes"];
    "Mark step complete" -> "More steps?";
    "More steps?" -> "Dispatch analyst subagent (./analyst-prompt.md)" [label="yes"];
    "More steps?" -> "Use requesting-red-team-review on whole result" [label="no"];
    "Use requesting-red-team-review on whole result" -> "Use reporting-and-archiving-findings";
}

Model Selection

Use the least powerful model that can handle each role.

  • Mechanical steps (load data, apply a fixed transform, produce a planned figure): fast, cheap model.
  • Integration/judgment steps (fitting the primary model, handling missingness per plan): standard model.
  • Rigor review and anomaly judgment: most capable model.

Handling Analyst Status

DONE: Proceed to protocol-compliance review.

DONE_WITH_CONCERNS: Read the concerns. If about correctness or an unexpected data issue, address before review (may need science-superpowers:investigating-anomalous-results). If an observation ("this file is getting large"), note and proceed.

NEEDS_CONTEXT: Provide the missing information and re-dispatch.

BLOCKED: Assess. Context problem → provide more and re-dispatch. Needs more reasoning → more capable model. Step too large → split. Plan itself is wrong → escalate to your human partner. A wrong plan may require re-opening the pre-registration, which must be documented as a deviation.

Never silently let a subagent change the registered analysis to make a step "work." A deviation is documented and renders that analysis exploratory.

Prompt Templates

  • ./analyst-prompt.md — dispatch the analyst subagent
  • ./protocol-compliance-reviewer-prompt.md — did it match the pre-registration?
  • ./rigor-reviewer-prompt.md — is the statistics correct, reproducible, leak-free?

Red Flags

Never:

  • Execute before the pre-registration is frozen
  • Skip either review (protocol OR rigor)
  • Let a subagent add an unregistered analysis and report it as confirmatory
  • Run rigor review before protocol compliance is green (wrong order)
  • Accept a silently dropped outlier or changed cutoff (route to anomaly investigation instead)
  • Dispatch multiple analyst subagents on the same artifacts in parallel (conflicts)
  • Make the subagent read the whole plan (provide the step's full text + the relevant pre-registration excerpt)

If a reviewer finds issues: the same analyst subagent fixes them, then the reviewer reviews again. Repeat until approved.

Integration

Required workflow skills:

  • science-superpowers:setting-up-reproducible-analysis — isolated, seeded, reproducible workspace (run first)
  • science-superpowers:preregistering-analysis — must be frozen before execution
  • science-superpowers:investigating-anomalous-results — when a step's output is surprising or impossible
  • science-superpowers:requesting-red-team-review — adversarial review of the whole result
  • science-superpowers:reporting-and-archiving-findings — after all steps complete

Subagents should use:

  • science-superpowers:verifying-results-before-claiming — before any subagent reports a step as done

Alternative:

  • science-superpowers:executing-analysis — inline execution for harnesses without subagents

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

Use when you have an approved research question and need a concrete analysis plan, before touching outcome data or fitting any model

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

K-Dense-AI/science-superpowers360Updated Sep 13, 2026

Use when facing 2+ independent investigations that can proceed without shared state - parallel literature survey, multi-dataset replication, or pre-specified robustness checks

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

K-Dense-AI/science-superpowers360Updated Sep 13, 2026

Use when your human partner has explicitly opted into exploratory or feasibility mode - a compute-heavy simulation, an unproven pipeline, an unbenchmarked solver, an untested cluster job - or when whether the work can run at all is still unknown, when a plan's largest configuration has never been executed, when a memory or wall-clock ceiling is estimated rather than measured, or when someone proposes pre-registering over runs that have never happened

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

K-Dense-AI/science-superpowers360Updated Sep 13, 2026

Use when you have a pre-registered analysis plan to execute inline in this session with review checkpoints, on a platform without subagents

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

K-Dense-AI/science-superpowers360Updated Sep 13, 2026

You MUST use this before any data analysis or investigation - before exploring a dataset, loading or profiling data, running a model, computing a statistic, or testing an idea, and before any outcome data is touched

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

K-Dense-AI/science-superpowers360Updated Sep 13, 2026

Use when a result is surprising, impossible, contradicts a sanity check, a pipeline fails, a model won't converge, or a replication fails - before adjusting anything

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

K-Dense-AI/science-superpowers360Updated Sep 13, 2026

See all skills by K-Dense-AI

Report a problem with this skill