thesis-assesor
From the author
Critically assess and improve a legal scholarly thesis, article idea, student note, seminar-paper claim, or research agenda using Eugene Volokh's novelty, nonobviousness, utility, and soundness framework, connector-aware research, claim-specific tests, and a sustainable adversarial pass. Produces a self-contained green-, yellow-, or red-light report. Use when a law professor or law student asks whether a claim is viable, novel, publishable, preempted, useful, worth pursuing, or better than competing topics; or wants a thesis stress-tested, narrowed, repaired, or compared. No connector is required: use connected legal and scholarly research when available, public sources otherwise, and disclose any no-research fallback.
Install
npx skills add lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills --skill thesis-assesor -a claude-code
Installs to .claude/skills/thesis-assesor/ · Each command fetches the skill straight from GitHub with the open skills CLI.
No download: this skill’s licence (APACHE-2.0) does not let us redistribute its files. The install commands fetch them from GitHub instead.
Want your agent to suggest skills while you type? See how to use skills from your IDE.
Safety checks on SKILL.md
No warnings.
Why 87
aiqbench computes the trust score from public signals. It is not a security audit, so read a skill before you install it.
Similar skills
Closest to this one by what they do and when they are used.
- research-proposalgaasher/Agent-Loop-SkillsUse when the user has a research proposal (problem + proposed methodology + planned experiments) and wants it iteratively strengthened until it clears a passing grade. ScholarEval grades the proposal against the literature (Soundness + Contribution), a Judge scores that feedback 0-100 on a fixed rubric, and a Reviser rewrites the proposal to fix the worst points without diluting the research question; loops until the grade passes or the budget is hit. Not for generating a proposal from scratch, and not for running a literature survey on its own.Science★ 180
- journal-reviewscdenney/open-science-skillsDrafts a referee report for a journal editor. Builds a ledger of the manuscript's load-bearing claims, runs five parallel adversarial finders against it (Breaker, Butcher, Shredder, Void, Situator), has a Blue Team test their evidence in both directions and rule on each claim, then writes a recommendation, claim-and-design summary, three to six decision-driving concerns tied to the claims they reach, additional concerns, and a revision plan, followed by a Tone Guard legal pass, a quote check, and an optional confidential editor note. Use when the user has been asked to referee a manuscript. Self-audits go to paper-review-lite or presubmit, and author responses go to referee-response.Engineering★ 69
- research-questiongaasher/Agent-Loop-SkillsUse when the user has a vague topic or area of interest and wants it sharpened into a few strong, novel, feasible research questions. Drafts candidate questions, scores each against a fixed rubric (Specific, Answerable, Novel, Feasible, Significant) with a light literature/web novelty check, and revises the weakest axis until enough questions clear the bar. Not for grading a full written proposal (use the research-proposal loop), and not for turning a question into testable predictions (use the hypothesis-generation loop).Science★ 180
- scholar-evaluationK-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skillsProvides qualitative-first, evidence-traceable developmental review of scholarly works and audit low-stakes research-assessment rubrics with optional local quality controls. Never use for ranking people or consequential decisions.Science★ 56.2K
- academic-reviserjoshua-zyy/academic-paper-writerSelf-review, audit, or verify CS/AI/ML paper drafts as a critical peer reviewer. Three-round review (evidence→argument→style) with Verification Status and debt tracking. Use when: reviewing a paper draft before submission, checking evidence compliance of claims, simulating peer reviewer feedback, verifying citation closure and evidence debts, performing cross-section consistency checks. Triggers on: self review, 自查, verification, 审稿, evidence compliance, peer review, 论文审查, draft audit, 验证论文, 检查引用, cross-section review, 审修, draft verification.Science★ 116
- good-questionRimagination/good-questionUse when a researcher is choosing, framing, refining, or stress-testing a research question, hypothesis, thesis topic, project idea, grant direction, paper angle, or stalled research direction.Testing★ 314
Ratings & reviews
—
no reviews
Tried this skill? Rate it to help others. Sign in
Discussion
Join the discussion. Sign in