critical-thinking
De la autor
Audit the reasoning of a document or argument (memo, proposal, investment analysis, board paper, article, the user's own draft): claims, evidence, unstated assumptions, logical gaps, fallacies, and what would falsify it, each anchored to quoted text. Use whenever the user wants reasoning examined, in any language ("audit this argument", "is this analysis sound", "poke holes in this proposal", "review the logic of my draft"; Vietnamese "phản biện giúp tôi", "soi lập luận này", "tài liệu này có lỗ hổng gì", "góp ý bản nháp của tôi"), even when they never say "critical thinking". Also use when the user drops a document and asks whether to trust or act on it, or asks to see their reasoning profile. Not for company-level strategic bets (strategy-board) or learning a topic through dialogue (socratic-questor).
Instalare
npx skills add tronghieu/agent-skills --skill critical-thinking -a claude-code
Se instalează în .claude/skills/critical-thinking/ · Fiecare comandă descarcă skill-ul direct de pe GitHub cu utilitarul open source skills.
Identic octet cu octet cu commit-ul scanat, cu licența depozitului și un fișier SOURCE.txt.
Vrei ca agentul să-ți propună skill-uri în timp ce scrii? Vezi cum folosești skill-urile din IDE.
Verificări de siguranță pe SKILL.md
- Include scripturi pe care nu le-am verificatScăzut
De ce 77
aiqbench calculează scorul de încredere din semnale publice. Nu este un audit de securitate, așa că citește un skill înainte să-l instalezi.
Skill-uri similare
Cele mai apropiate de acesta prin ce fac și când sunt folosite.
- scientific-critical-thinkingK-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skillsEvaluates scientific claims and evidence quality. Applies to experimental design validity, biases and confounders, statistical interpretation, evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), and teaching critical analysis. Supports evidence appraisal and identifying flaws; formal peer review writing belongs to peer-review.Știință★ 54.5K
- critical-readingTibsfox/gsd-skill-creatorAnalytical evaluation of texts for argument quality, author purpose, bias, credibility, and rhetorical strategy. Covers the distinction between comprehension and critique, argument analysis (claims, evidence, reasoning, warrants), rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, logos), bias identification (selection bias, confirmation bias, loaded language, omission), source credibility evaluation (CRAAP test, lateral reading), propaganda techniques, media literacy, and multi-text synthesis. Use when evaluating arguments, identifying bias, assessing source reliability, analyzing rhetoric, or synthesizing across multiple texts on the same topic.Testare★ 71
- rethinkOvid/paadUse when options, a recommendation, or an already-chosen approach are on the table and the reasoning under them has not been independently checked — especially when the case rests on cited documentation, remembered behavior, or premises nobody verified. Not for generating alternatives, and not for critiquing a spec, which is /pushback.Planificare★ 143
- critical-perspectiveinfranodus/skillsEngage in critical thinking by questioning assumptions, exploring alternative perspectives, and uncovering latent topics in conversations. Use when discussions could benefit from deeper exploration, when identifying blind spots, or when broadening understanding through respectful challenge and curiosity-driven inquiry.Altele★ 122
- grammar-checkphuryn/pm-skillsIdentify grammar, logical, and flow errors in text and suggest targeted fixes without rewriting the entire text. Use when proofreading content, checking writing quality, or reviewing a draft.Redactare★ 27.4K
- narrative-buildingscdenney/open-science-skillsDrafts or audits a scientific paper’s introduction and framing — the real-world "why", an evidence audit, the funnel from theory to a falsifiable if-then with a named estimand, bridges across experiments, and a contribution list matched to the design. Use when the user asks to write, restructure, or critique an introduction, motivate or frame a paper, repair a gap-in-the-literature opening, sharpen or calibrate a contribution claim, or connect experiments into one argument. Sentence-level flow and wording are out of scope.Design★ 69
Note și recenzii
—
nicio recenzie
Ai încercat acest skill? Notează-l ca să-i ajuți pe alții. Autentifică-te
Discuție
Intră în discuție. Autentifică-te