research-routes
De la autor
Compare multiple research routes with explicit Claims, Evidence, unknowns, failure regimes, and reversible probes. Use when a person needs route-neutral exploration before implementation, experiment authorization, HumanDecision, or canonical-state promotion.
Instalare
npx skills add zenx0x/allinluna --skill research-routes -a claude-code
Se instalează în .claude/skills/research-routes/ · 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
Niciun avertisment.
De ce 80
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.
- research-routes-explorezenx0x/allinlunaExplore open-ended scientific or product questions through multiple concurrent Research Routes branches, probes, experiments, observations, evidence polarity, failure regimes, unknowns, and mature-method comparators. Use for research exploration or hybrid discovery from any starting point while keeping a route-neutral terrain map separate from claims, authorization, implementation, and canonical state.Știință★ 63
- research-routes-runzenx0x/allinlunaExecute an approved Research Routes context across software, research-exploration, or hybrid journeys with concurrent route owners, shared control-plane resources, CounterPilot read-only boundaries, explicit evidence and provenance, lifecycle recovery, and HumanDecision seams. Use when implementation or experiments must proceed without treating AI inference as fact or silently changing canonical state.Știință★ 63
- research-routes-planzenx0x/allinlunaPlan software, research-exploration, or hybrid work from a repository, question, problem, frame, or arbitrary starting point. Use when Codex needs a route-neutral map, shared backbone, concurrent routes and branches, explicit claims and hypotheses, provenance, evidence polarity, lifecycle recovery, or a plan that keeps candidate inference separate from HumanDecision and canonical state.Știință★ 63
- compare-research-methodsxingtaxueshu/literature-review-skillsCompare research methods for an academic literature review, thesis proposal, or methodology section by linking each method to what it can and cannot answer. Use when the user needs to justify method choice, compare quantitative/qualitative/mixed-method designs, build a methods table, or turn "I will use this method" into a defensible argument tied to the research question.Știință★ 65
- researchalirezarezvani/claude-skillsDefault entry point for any research request — a hybrid router that classifies the question deterministically and either delegates to a specialist research skill (pulse for trends/sentiment, grants for NIH funding, litreview for academic literature, syllabus for course reading, patent for prior-art + IP landscape, dossier for entity research, deepread for evidence-first reading of supplied documents) or runs its own plan-decompose-multi-source-search-synthesize-cite fallback workflow when no specialist matches. Always surfaces the routing decision so users can override. Use when the user makes any research request that doesn't obviously match a more-specific specialist skill (e.g., "research [topic]", "look into [topic]", "what do we know about [topic]", "investigate [topic]", "find me information on [topic]", "do some research on [topic]", "I need to understand [topic]"). Output is a markdown briefing (default) or .docx document (on request) with full citations and an audit log.Știință★ 28.7K
- 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).Știință★ 177
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