Research
Research, evidence gathering, literature, reports, investigation, and synthesis
Browse research skills
Showing 19,561–19,584 of 22,710 skills
End-to-end Stata replication pipeline — scaffolds numbered `.do` files in `scripts/stata/`, executes them via the `stata-mcp` MCP server, captures logs and outputs to `scripts/stata/_outputs/`, and produces publication-ready tables (esttab) and figures (graph export). Mirrors `/data-analysis` for R-first projects. Use when user says "stata replication", "set up Stata pipeline", "scaffold the .do files", "run Stata analysis", "AEA replication package in Stata", or when a project's analysis lan...
Multi-agent comprehensive slide review (visual + pedagogy + proofreading, plus TikZ / parity / substance conditionally). Use when user says "full review", "excellence pass", "comprehensive check", "review everything", "pre-release review", "slide excellence", or before teaching / shipping a deck. Fanout wrapper — for a single lens, use `/visual-audit`, `/pedagogy-review`, or `/proofread` directly.
Scaffold and run a reproducible Monte Carlo simulation study in R — parameterized DGP, an estimator grid, a seeded replication loop, and a summary of bias, RMSE, empirical SE, coverage, size/power with Monte Carlo standard errors. Use when the user says "run a Monte Carlo simulation", "simulation study", "check the bias/coverage of an estimator", "compare estimators in simulation", "size and power simulation", "Monte Carlo experiment", or wants to demonstrate an estimator's finite-sample prop...
Mechanize Pattern 15 — the seven-pass adversarial review protocol for academic manuscripts. Spawns 7 forked subagents in parallel (abstract, intro, methods, results, robustness, prose, citations), then synthesizes a prioritized revision checklist. Use for submission-ready or R&R-stage papers where single-pass review isn't enough.
Scaffold a graded problem set with sections, problems, worked solutions, and short "why this matters" explainers across analytical, empirical, and coding types. Use when user says "make a problem set on X", "scaffold exercises for this lecture", "create practice problems", "generate homework with a solution key", "build a graded assignment on topic Y". Emits a clean student set plus a separate solution key — NOT for grading submissions or auto-checking student answers.
Read-only R code review protocol for `.R` scripts. Checks code quality, reproducibility, domain correctness, tidyverse idioms, and professional standards; produces a report without editing. Use when user says "review this R script", "check the R code", "audit the analysis code", "code review on the R", or when an R file is touched as part of a paper submission. NOT for running the code — pair with `/audit-reproducibility` for numeric verification.
Comprehensive manuscript review with three modes: single-pass (default), --adversarial critic-fixer loop, and --peer [journal] simulated peer-review pipeline (editor + 2 dispositioned referees + editorial decision, calibrated to a target journal). R&R continuation via --peer --r2/--r3; hostile-editor stress test via --peer --stress; reviewer-disposition variance reporting via --peer --variance N. Auto-invokes /review-r + /audit-reproducibility on referenced scripts unless --no-cross-artifact.
Generate a structured response-to-referees document from a referee report and the revised manuscript. Maps each referee comment to the specific revision, classifies coverage (addressed / partially / deferred / disagreement), and drafts polite but firm responses. Use during the R&R (revise-and-resubmit) stage of paper revision.
Turn student course evaluations (free-text + numeric) into an actionable teaching-improvement plan — the teaching analogue of /respond-to-referees. Clusters comments into themes, separates signal from noise, classifies each theme Keep / Change / Investigate / Out-of-scope, and drafts concrete changes mapped to the syllabus and slide decks. Use when user says "respond to my evals", "what do these course evaluations tell me", "turn my teaching feedback into a plan", or after a semester's evals ...
Generate structured research questions, testable hypotheses, and candidate empirical strategies from a topic, phenomenon, or dataset description. Use when user says "give me research ideas on X", "brainstorm questions about Y", "what could I study with this data?", "I'm looking for a paper idea on...", "generate hypotheses for...". One-shot generation, not multi-turn. For idea-refinement use `/interview-me`.
Assemble a submission-ready replication package to the AEA Data and Code Availability Standard (DCAS) / openICPSR / Social Science Reproduction Platform expectations — standard replication README, dataset manifest, computational-requirements capture, a Table/Figure → script:line map, and a confidential-data deposit plan. Use when user says "build the replication package", "prepare the openICPSR deposit", "make the AEA data and code package", "DCAS compliance", "assemble the deposit for the jo...
Run the full R package release gate — regenerate docs, run the test suite, run R CMD check --as-cran, and triage every ERROR / WARNING / NOTE against CRAN policy before a release or submission. Use when the user says "check my R package", "R CMD check", "is this package CRAN-ready", "run devtools::check", "prepare for CRAN submission", or points at a directory containing a DESCRIPTION file. Produces a check report + CRAN-submission checklist in `quality_reports/`.
Adversarial Quarto-vs-Beamer parity QA. A critic agent compares the Quarto HTML render to the Beamer PDF benchmark for content/visual parity; a fixer agent applies fixes; loops until APPROVED (max 5 rounds). Use when user says "qa the quarto", "check parity", "does the html match the pdf?", "quarto matches beamer?", or after a translate-to-quarto run. Requires both the `.qmd` rendered and a `.pdf` benchmark.
Read-only proofreading pass over lecture `.tex` or `.qmd` files. Checks grammar, typos, overflow, terminology consistency, and academic writing quality; produces a report without editing. Use when user says "proofread", "check for typos", "look for grammar issues", "copy-edit this", "any writing errors?", or before a lecture release.
Review candidate `[LEARN]` entries in `.claude/state/personal-memory.md` (gitignored) and run them through a five-critic council in parallel: generality, staleness, redundancy, evidence, format. Majority vote (3+ of 5) promotes the entry to MEMORY.md. Use when user says "promote memory", "review my learnings", "what should graduate to MEMORY.md", "five-critic council", or as monthly memory maintenance.
Draft a structured preregistration document (OSF, AsPredicted, or AEA RCT Registry style) from a research spec or free-form study description. Output is a Markdown file with hypotheses, design, sampling plan, analysis plan, exclusions, and inference criteria — annotated with MUST / SHOULD / MAY clarity flags. Use when user says "preregister", "draft a preregistration", "OSF preregistration", "AsPredicted", "AEA RCT registry", "PAP", "preanalysis plan", or before launching an experiment / data...
Compute statistical power, required sample size, and minimum detectable effect (MDE) for a study design, then write a registry-ready power section. Handles two-arm RCTs (with clustering / ICC and unequal allocation), multiple-arm corrections, and a simulation-based power option for non-standard designs (DiD/event-study, IV, panel). Use when user says "power analysis", "power calculation", "MDE", "minimum detectable effect", "how big a sample do I need", "is my study powered", "power for an RC...
Diagnose why Claude Code is (or isn't) prompting for permission. By default reads only repo-local layers (CLI project, CLI project-local, VSCode workspace). Host-global layers (CLI user `~/.claude/`, VSCode user settings) are read ONLY when the user explicitly confirms — those files may contain unrelated paths or secrets. Use when user says "why is it asking me to approve?", "permission check", "why am I getting prompts?", "bypass isn't working", "check my permissions". Read-only diagnostic.
Holistic pedagogical review of a lecture deck (`.qmd` or `.tex`). Checks narrative arc, prerequisite assumptions, worked examples, notation clarity, and deck-level pacing. Use when user says "pedagogy review", "does this teach well?", "is the flow right?", "will students follow?", "review the narrative", or before teaching a deck for the first time. Read-only; produces a report.
Scaffold a new skill that follows this repo's conventions — interviews for purpose, trigger phrases, and tool needs, then writes `.claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md` from the skill template with frontmatter and body that pass the integrity gates on first try. Use when user says "write a skill", "scaffold a skill", "create a new skill", "I keep doing X, make it a skill", "new slash command", or "turn this workflow into a skill". NOT for capturing a one-off session discovery — that is `/learn`.
Scaffold a new TikZ diagram from the snippet gallery with prevention rules pre-applied (explicit node dimensions, coordinate map, directional edge labels). Compiles standalone, invokes tikz-reviewer with citations from tikz-measurement.md, and loops on revisions until APPROVED.
Structured literature search + synthesis with citation extraction, thematic clustering, and gap identification. Use when user says "find papers on X", "do a lit review", "what's the literature on...", "summarize what we know about...", "where's the gap in this field", "review recent work on Y". Produces a written review with BibTeX-ready citations. Uses WebSearch/WebFetch for recent work.
Extract reusable knowledge from the current session into a persistent skill. Use when you discover something non-obvious, create a workaround, or develop a multi-step workflow that future sessions would benefit from.
Interactive interview that formalizes a fuzzy research idea into a structured spec (RQ, hypotheses, identification, data needs, empirical strategy). Use when user says "interview me", "help me think through this idea", "I have a half-baked idea", "formalize this into a project", "walk me through framing a study". Multi-turn Q&A; saves spec to disk. NOT for lit review (`/lit-review`) or ideation from scratch (`/research-ideation`).