本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

quality-gate

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.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md5.3 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

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.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

a1

無料

VS-Enhanced Research Question Refiner - Prevents Mode Collapse and derives differentiated research questions Enhanced VS 3-Phase process: Modal question avoidance, alternatives presentation, differentiated RQ recommendation Use when: refining research ideas, formulating research questions, clarifying scope Triggers: research question, 연구 질문, PICO, SPIDER, research idea

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,6062026年10月12日 更新

a2

無料

VS-Enhanced Theoretical Framework Architect with Critique & Visualization Full VS 5-Phase process: Modal theory avoidance, Long-tail exploration, differentiated framework presentation Absorbed A3 (Devil's Advocate) critique and A6 (Conceptual Framework Visualizer) capabilities Use when: building theoretical foundations, designing conceptual models, deriving hypotheses, critiquing frameworks, visualizing models Triggers: theoretical framework, 이론적 프레임워크, conceptual model, 개념적 모형, hypothesis derivation, critique, devil's advocate, 반론, visualization, diagram

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,6062026年10月12日 更新

a5

無料

Agent A5 - Paradigm & Worldview Advisor - Philosophical foundations for research design. Covers ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology alignment. Use when: establishing philosophical foundations, justifying methodological choices, writing positionality statements Triggers: paradigm, 패러다임, ontology, epistemology, worldview, 세계관, philosophical foundations, 철학적 기초

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,6062026年10月12日 更新

Academic paper writing skill with 12-agent pipeline. v2.5: Style Calibration (learn author's writing voice from past papers) + Writing Quality Check (writing quality checklist for natural prose). Supports IMRaD, literature review, theoretical, case study, policy brief, and conference paper structures. APA 7.0 (default), Chicago, MLA, IEEE, Vancouver citation formats. Bilingual abstracts (zh-TW + EN). Multi-format output (LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, Markdown). Triggers on: write paper, academic paper, paper outline, write abstract, revise paper, check citations, convert to LaTeX, guide my paper, parse reviews, revision roadmap, 寫論文, 學術論文, 論文大綱, 寫摘要, 修改論文, 檢查引用, 引導我寫論文, 帶我規劃論文, 逐章規劃, 論文架構, 審查意見, 修訂路線圖.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,6062026年10月12日 更新

Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality checks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,6062026年10月12日 更新

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, and Socratic guided modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,6062026年10月12日 更新

brycewang-stanford のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する