scientific-critical-thinking
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.
Quality
Validation
75%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 12 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' must be a string, got object | Fail |
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (572 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
referenced_paths_exist | Referenced path issues: 14 missing | Warning |
Total | 12 / 16 Failed | |
- Repository
- wu-yc/LabClaw
- Commit
df37802
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.