home / skills / poemswe / co-researcher / analyze

analyze skill

/.codex/skills/analyze

This skill conducts rigorous critical analysis of content, assessing evidence, logic, bias, and methodology to reveal strengths and weaknesses.

npx playbooks add skill poemswe/co-researcher --skill analyze

Review the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.

Files (1)
SKILL.md
1.2 KB
---
name: analyze
description: Critically analyze content, claims, or arguments with rigorous evaluation.
metadata:
  short-description: Critical Analysis
---
# /analyze - Critical Analysis

I'll conduct a rigorous critical analysis of content you provide.

## What I'll evaluate:

### Evidence Quality
- Source credibility and authority
- Evidence type and strength
- Support for claims made

### Logical Validity
- Argument structure
- Logical fallacies
- Hidden assumptions

### Bias Detection
- Cognitive biases
- Research biases
- Conflicts of interest

### Methodology
- Research design appropriateness
- Internal/external validity
- Statistical rigor (if applicable)

### Alternative Explanations
- Competing hypotheses
- Confounding factors
- Simpler explanations

## What I need:
Provide one of:
- URL to content
- Text to analyze
- Paper/document reference
- Claim or argument

## Output:
You'll receive:
- Claim extraction and mapping
- Evidence assessment table
- List of logical issues
- Bias concerns
- Methodology critique
- Alternative explanations
- Overall strength rating
- Key concerns and recommendations

What would you like me to analyze?
Project: $ARGUMENTS

Overview

This skill performs rigorous critical analysis of content, claims, or arguments to reveal strengths, weaknesses, and practical implications. I extract core claims, evaluate evidence quality, detect logical flaws and bias, and deliver actionable recommendations. The result is a clear rating of overall strength and prioritized next steps.

How this skill works

Provide a URL, text, paper reference, or a specific claim and I will parse the material and map its claims. I assess source credibility, evidence types, logical structure, methodological soundness, and potential biases. The output includes an evidence assessment table, list of logical issues, bias concerns, methodological critique, alternative explanations, an overall strength rating, and concise recommendations.

When to use it

  • Evaluating the credibility of news articles, blog posts, or social media claims.
  • Reviewing academic papers, reports, or white papers before relying on their conclusions.
  • Preparing to debate or fact-check a public statement or policy proposal.
  • Checking research methods and statistics used to support a claim.
  • Assessing corporate or industry communications for conflicts of interest.

Best practices

  • Provide the exact text, URL, or citation to ensure precise claim extraction.
  • Specify the claim(s) you care most about to focus the analysis.
  • Share relevant context (audience, purpose, assumptions) if available.
  • Use the recommendations to prioritize further evidence collection or expert review.

Example use cases

  • Analyze a viral social media post that makes causal claims about health.
  • Critically evaluate a company’s sustainability report before investment.
  • Assess the methodology and conclusions of a preprint research paper.
  • Prepare counterarguments and identify weak premises for a policy debate.

FAQ

What formats can you analyze?

I can analyze plain text, web pages (URL), paper citations, or a direct claim you provide.

Do you provide formal statistical recalculations?

I critique statistical methods and flag concerns; I can re-evaluate simple calculations if raw data or detailed results are provided.

How definitive is the overall strength rating?

The rating summarizes confidence based on supplied evidence and analysis; it is interpretive and may change with additional data.