Deep analysis of articles/long-form via thinking frameworks (SCQA, mental models, inversion) — 'analyze article', 'deep dive', 'extract insights', URL/text wanting depth not summary.
Scanned 9/2/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add event4u-app/agent-config --skill deep-reading-analyst --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Deep Reading Analyst?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/event4u-app-deep-reading-analyst-agent-config)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
model_tier: high
context: large
name: deep-reading-analyst
description: "Deep analysis of articles/long-form via thinking frameworks (SCQA, mental models, inversion) — 'analyze article', 'deep dive', 'extract insights', URL/text wanting depth not summary."
status: active
domain: discovery
workspaces:
- engineering
packs:
- engineering-base
---
# deep-reading-analyst
Wing-1 deep-thinking skill for articles, papers, opinion pieces, case studies, and long-form decision documents. Routes the user's content through 8 thinking frameworks at four depth levels (Quick / Standard / Deep / Research) and returns insight tied to the user's **goal**, not framework completion.
## When to use
- User pastes an article URL, paper, or long text and wants depth ("analyze", "deep dive", "extract insights", "help me understand").
- User asks for a specific framework ("apply SCQA to this", "use inversion thinking", "give me the mental models lens").
- User is making a decision and wants pre-mortem / multi-lens analysis on a written proposal.
- User is studying or note-taking on dense material (research papers, strategy memos, books).
Do NOT use when:
- User wants a 3-bullet TL;DR — use `agent-docs-writing` or write a direct summary.
- Content is code or a diff — route to `judge-bug-hunter`, `judge-code-quality`, or `adversarial-review`.
- User wants risk analysis on a code change — route to `adversarial-review` (diff-bound) or `threat-modeling`.
- User wants debugging or incident analysis — route to `bug-analyzer` or `systematic-debugging`.
## Framework Arsenal
| Depth | Time | Frameworks | Reference module |
|---|---|---|---|
| **L1 — Quick** | ~15 min | SCQA, 5W2H | [`scqa-framework`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/scqa-framework.md), [`5w2h-analysis`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/5w2h-analysis.md) |
| **L2 — Standard** | ~30 min | L1 + Critical Thinking, Inversion | + [`critical-thinking`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/critical-thinking.md), [`inversion-thinking`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/inversion-thinking.md) |
| **L3 — Deep** | ~60 min | L2 + Mental Models, First Principles, Systems Thinking, Six Hats | + [`mental-models`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/mental-models.md), [`first-principles`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/first-principles.md), [`systems-thinking`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/systems-thinking.md), [`six-hats`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/six-hats.md) |
| **L4 — Research** | 120 min+ | L3 + Cross-source comparison via web search | + [`comparison-matrix`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/comparison-matrix.md) |
Every framework module is a project-local guideline under `docs/guidelines/agent-infra/`. Nothing is loaded from upstream at runtime.
## Procedure: deep-reading-analyst
### Step 0: Inspect
1. **Detect content type** — article, paper, opinion piece, case study, how-to, strategy memo. Drives auto-suggested frameworks (Step 1).
2. **Detect goal signal** — problem-solving, learning, writing reference, decision-making, curiosity. Drives Step 4 output shape.
3. **Skip if mismatched** — see "Do NOT use when" above; route to the named skill.
### Step 1: Initialize Analysis
Open with ONE decision point (per `ask-when-uncertain` — a single numbered-options block answerable with a single number is one question; never three separate asks):
1. **Standard read** — L2 depth, auto-selected frameworks (default).
2. **Quick skim** — L1 depth, auto-selected frameworks.
3. **Deep dive** — L3/L4 depth, auto-selected frameworks.
4. **Custom** — name your goal (problem-solving · learning · writing · decision-making · curiosity), depth level, and/or specific frameworks in your reply.
Depth levels are scope descriptors, not wall-clock promises (per `direct-answers` — no duration estimates): L1 skim · L2 standard · L3 deep · L4 exhaustive-research.
If the user does not answer, default to L2 Standard with auto-selected frameworks.
**Auto-suggest matrix:**
| Content type | Default frameworks |
|---|---|
| Strategy / business article | SCQA + Mental Models + Inversion |
| Research paper | 5W2H + Critical Thinking + Systems Thinking |
| How-to guide | SCQA + 5W2H + First Principles |
| Opinion piece | Critical Thinking + Inversion + Six Hats |
| Case study | SCQA + Mental Models + Systems Thinking |
### Step 2: Structural Understanding (always run)
Regardless of depth, open with two short blocks:
**2A — Basic structure.**
```markdown
📄 Type: [article/paper/report]
🎯 Core thesis: [one sentence]
Structure:
├─ Argument 1 → [key support]
├─ Argument 2 → [key support]
└─ Argument 3 → [key support]
Key concepts: [3–5 terms with one-line definitions]
```
**2B — SCQA breakdown.** Apply the four-element decomposition from [`scqa-framework`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/scqa-framework.md):
```markdown
**S (Situation)**: [context the article establishes]
**C (Complication)**: [problem identified]
**Q (Question)**: [core question]
**A (Answer)**: [main solution / conclusion]
Structure quality — clarity / logic / completeness: [★★★☆☆]
```
**2C — 5W2H gap check** (L1+). Quick scan: which of *What, Why, Who, When, Where, How, How much* are well-covered, partial, or missing? Flag the 1–2 most critical gaps.
### Step 3: Apply Frameworks (depth-gated)
Load only the frameworks the user's depth bought. Each framework follows the same pattern: **load reference module → apply lens → produce one fixed-shape block**.
**L2 additions:**
- **Critical Thinking** ([`critical-thinking`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/critical-thinking.md)) — argument strength score (X/10), strengths, weaknesses, logical fallacies detected.
- **Inversion** ([`inversion-thinking`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/inversion-thinking.md)) — pre-mortem on the article's recommendation: "how would this fail?", missing risk factors, mitigations.
**L3 additions:**
- **Mental Models** ([`mental-models`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/mental-models.md)) — pick 3–5 models from different disciplines (physics, biology, psychology, economics, math), apply each lens, surface cross-model patterns.
- **First Principles** ([`first-principles`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/first-principles.md)) — strip to fundamental truths, validate each core assumption, rebuild from base.
- **Systems Thinking** ([`systems-thinking`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/systems-thinking.md)) — map relationships, feedback loops, leverage points.
- **Six Hats** ([`six-hats`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/six-hats.md)) — White (facts), Red (feelings), Black (cautions), Yellow (benefits), Green (creativity), Blue (process).
**L4 addition:**
- **Cross-source comparison** ([`comparison-matrix`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/comparison-matrix.md)) — web-search 2–3 related sources, compare SCQA across sources, identify consensus vs divergence, synthesize integrated perspective.
- **Disconfirmation + per-part grounding (pre-synthesis gate)** — run at least one search that tries to *falsify* the leading takeaway (rule alternatives in/out, not only confirm), and ground each part of the reading goal in a retrieved source before writing it. Distinct from [`verify-before-complete`](../../../src/rules/verify-before-complete.md) (completion evidence).
### Step 4: Synthesize by Goal
Output shape is **driven by Step 0 goal**, not by frameworks applied. Pick exactly one of the four blocks below.
**For problem-solving:** Applicable solutions (2–3 from content) → Application plan with timed action steps → Success metrics → Risk mitigations from Inversion.
**For learning:** Core concepts (definition + example) → Mental models gained → Connections to prior knowledge → First Principles fundamental question → 3 verification questions (understanding / application / evaluation).
**For writing reference:** Key arguments + evidence (with paragraph citations) → Quotable insights with context → Critical analysis (strengths for citing, limitations for balanced discussion) → Alternative perspectives from Mental Models → Gaps and counterfactuals.
**For decision-making:** Options presented → Multi-model evaluation (economic + risk + systems lens) → Six Hats decision analysis → Scenario analysis (best / worst / most likely) → Synthesized recommendation.
### Step 5: Knowledge Activation (always end here)
Regardless of goal, close with three fixed blocks:
```markdown
## 🎯 Top 3 takeaways
1. **[Insight]** — Why it matters: [...] · One action: [specific, time-bound]
2. **[Insight]** — Why it matters: [...] · One action: [specific, time-bound]
3. **[Insight]** — Why it matters: [...] · One action: [specific, time-bound]
## 💡 Quick win — one tiny, specific action for the next 24 hours.
## 🧭 Frameworks used
✅ SCQA ✅ 5W2H ✅ Critical ✅ Inversion
□ Mental Models □ First Principles □ Systems □ Six Hats
```
### Step 6: Validate
1. Every claim is faithful to the source — no misrepresentation, facts distinguished from opinions.
2. Frameworks applied **purposefully**, not force-fit — drop a framework that adds no insight rather than padding the output.
3. Output ends with concrete, actionable steps — no analysis-without-application.
4. Specific citations (paragraph numbers, quotes) where the source supports them.
## Output format
1. **Structural block (Step 2)** — type / thesis / structure tree / key concepts / SCQA / 5W2H gaps.
2. **Framework blocks (Step 3)** — one fixed-shape block per framework the depth bought.
3. **Goal-shaped synthesis (Step 4)** — problem-solving / learning / writing / decision-making.
4. **Knowledge activation (Step 5)** — top 3 takeaways · quick win · frameworks-used checkboxes.
## Gotcha
- The model tends to **apply every framework** even at L1 — respect the depth budget; skip frameworks the user did not buy.
- The model tends to **summarize** instead of analyze when the user pastes long text — go deep on 1–3 points, not shallow on all of them.
- Inversion drifts into adversarial code review — this skill targets **decisions and arguments**, not diffs. Route diff stress-tests to `adversarial-review` / `judge-bug-hunter`.
- Mental Models drifts into name-dropping — pick 3–5, apply each lens *concretely* to the article's claims, drop models that yield no new insight.
- L4 cross-source comparison drifts into a literature review — keep it to 2–3 sources, focus on consensus / divergence / unique value.
- Output without action steps is a failure mode — every Step-4 synthesis must end with timed, concrete actions tied to the user's goal.
## Do NOT
- Do NOT force-apply all frameworks at the user's chosen depth — drop ones that add no insight.
- Do NOT copy text verbatim from the source — always reword for the user's understanding; any exact quote follows `content-quoting-floor` (≤15 words, one quote per source).
- Do NOT restate a fresh-lookup-class claim (current status, version, price, date) from model memory — verify against a live source or flag it as unverified, per `asking-and-brevity-examples § Volatile-fact freshness`.
- Do NOT use academic jargon without one-line definitions in the "key concepts" block.
- Do NOT skip Step 5 — the takeaways + quick win are the load-bearing output, not optional decoration.
- Do NOT route code reviews, diff stress-tests, or incident debugging through this skill.
## Reference modules
All 8 framework modules are project-local guidelines under `docs/guidelines/agent-infra/` (full text adopted under the Reference-Guideline Sunset Policy). Each carries an `## ADOPT citation` footer pinning its MIT upstream origin.
- [`scqa-framework`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/scqa-framework.md) — situation / complication / question / answer decomposition.
- [`5w2h-analysis`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/5w2h-analysis.md) — completeness check (7 questions).
- [`critical-thinking`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/critical-thinking.md) — argument quality / fallacy detection.
- [`inversion-thinking`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/inversion-thinking.md) — pre-mortem on decisions, distinct from `adversarial-review`.
- [`mental-models`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/mental-models.md) — Munger's multi-discipline toolkit.
- [`first-principles`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/first-principles.md) — fundamental-truth extraction.
- [`systems-thinking`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/systems-thinking.md) — feedback loops + leverage points.
- [`six-hats`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/six-hats.md) — White / Red / Black / Yellow / Green / Blue protocol.
- [`comparison-matrix`](../../../docs/guidelines/agent-infra/comparison-matrix.md) — cross-source synthesis (L4 only).
> **Deprecated — on-demand upstream loading.** Earlier revisions of this skill described loading some modules "on demand from a SHA-pinned URL", backed by an `external_source` frontmatter pin. That capability was **never wired** (no fetcher ever consumed the pin; it was schema-only metadata), so the pin and its `refresh_trigger` / `sunset_criterion` bundle have been **removed** — every module is local, no runtime fetch is needed. If a future revision genuinely needs live upstream content, build an explicit fetch step; do not reintroduce a non-functional metadata pin.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!