SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BF ars-deep-research

Universal deep research agent team. 13-agent pipeline for rigorous academic research on any topic. 8 modes: full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, three-way literature scan, Socratic guided research dialogue, and systematic review with optional meta-analysis. Covers research question formulation, Socratic mentoring, methodology design, systematic literature search, source verification, cross-source synthesis, risk of bias assessment, meta-analysis, APA 7.0 report compilation, editorial review, devil's advocate challenges, ethics review, and post-research literature monitoring. Triggers on: research, deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, PRISMA, evidence synthesis, fact-check, WHY HOW WHAT papers, 3W literature scan, guide my research, help me think through, 研究, 深度研究, 文獻回顧, 文獻探討, 系統性回顧, 後設分析, 事實查核, 三段式文獻掃描, 引導我的研究, 幫我釐清, 幫我想想, 我不確定要研究什麼, 研究方向, 研究主題, 심층 연구, 문헌 조사, 체계적 문헌고찰, 메타분석, 사실 확인, 연구 방향을 잡아줘, 연구 주제 정하는 것을 도와줘.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: sedey999 v2.12.2 MIT-0 80 files body ≈ 9 425 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 4 d ago

As a process F 53/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/shared/intent_clarification_protocol.md, references/shared/mode_spectrum.md, references/socratic_mentor_agent.md

ProcedureResearchAI and agentsInfrastructuretype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: OpenClaw Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
81/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
55
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
53/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: references/shared/intent_clarification_protocol.md, references/shared/mode_spectrum.md, references/socratic_mentor_agent.md
Tools and files w 18
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
  2. The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
  3. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
For the model run — optional
  • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
  • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

Guard findings · 1

✓ No critical or high findings

Medium and low: 1
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/guides/interdisciplinary_bridges.md:164
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
    | Computer Science | Achieving fairness and explainability at the technical level | Fairness metrics, XAI, alignment | Algorithm design, benchmarking | Bias detection tools, explainable models, red te
    detector

Files scanned: 80. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
  • warning body-long SKILL.md body ≈ 9425 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/shared/intent_clarification_protocol.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/shared/mode_spectrum.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/socratic_mentor_agent.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/source_verification_agent.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/synthesis_agent.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/shared/human_subjects_authority_protocol.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/shared/human_subjects_authority_registry.json
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/shared/review_pathway_rule_trace_protocol.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/shared/submission_packet_manifest_protocol.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/shared/cross_document_consistency_advisory_protocol.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/templates/research_brief_template.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/templates/literature_matrix_template.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/templates/evidence_assessment_template.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/templates/preregistration_template.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/templates/prisma_protocol_template.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/templates/prisma_report_template.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/shared/model_tiering.md

Process rating: all ten parameters 53/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: references/shared/intent_clarification_protocol.md, references/shared/mode_spectrum.md, references/socratic_mentor_agent.md
  • 0Tools and files. 17 referenced file(s) missing: references/shared/intent_clarification_protocol.md, references/shared/mode_spectrum.md, references/socratic_mentor_agent.md
  • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
  • 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
  • 40Execution cost. Instruction body is 9425 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
  • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
  • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
  • 100Steps. 58 steps
  • 100Failures and branches. 7 branches, has a failure section
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
  • low 28 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill

Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

Quality signals

  • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
  • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
  • +3Description length 984: 120–800 characters recommended
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +4Structure: 35 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 58 items
  • +3Output format is stated explicitly
  • +4Has examples (6 code blocks)
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (10 of 10)
  • +1License stated

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 55.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
This research skill is mostly coherent, but it needs review because it includes hidden opt-in user-behavior probes and broad local/external processing beyond a simple research assistant.
LLM: suspicious (high) · 22 Aug 2026