scientific-critical-thinking

8.3

186

303

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.

research analysis

8.3

Rating

Installs

Tools & Utilities

Quick Review

Exceptional skill for systematic scientific critical thinking. The description clearly communicates when to invoke the skill (evaluating research methodology, identifying biases, applying GRADE/Cochrane frameworks). SKILL.md provides comprehensive, actionable frameworks across 7 core capabilities with specific evaluation checklists, red flags, and structured feedback approaches. The logical structure balances detailed guidance in SKILL.md with properly delegated comprehensive reference materials covering biases, statistical pitfalls, evidence hierarchies, fallacies, and experimental design. Task knowledge is outstanding—a CLI agent would need many tokens and expert knowledge to replicate these systematic frameworks, evidence grading systems, and bias taxonomies. The skill meaningfully reduces cost by encoding expert-level scientific evaluation methodology. Minor opportunity: could make the 7 capabilities slightly more scannable with a table of contents, but current structure with bold headers and clear 'Apply when' sections is already very usable.