agentsclimarketplace

Hypothesis initial review

Skill panjose/Co-Scientist/skills/hypothesis-initial-review

Scientific agent skills for Claude Code and Codex that turn research goals into auditable hypothesis generation, review, ranking, evolution, and synthesis.

Install
npx -y skills add panjose/Co-Scientist --skill hypothesis-initial-review

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 4 stars4 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Run the initial review gate for a hypothesis.

SKILL.md

2.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

hypothesis-initial-review

Goal:

  • Run the initial review gate for a hypothesis.

Inputs:

  • research_plan/RESEARCH_PLAN.json
  • hypotheses/<id>/HYPOTHESIS.json
  • optional meta/INSIGHTS_FROM_REVIEWS.json or other run-level review guidance when available

Outputs:

  • hypotheses/<id>/REVIEW/INITIAL_REVIEW.json

Context Loading:

  • Read research_plan/RESEARCH_PLAN.json.
  • Treat research_goal as the target problem.
  • Treat preferences as the main evaluation axes.
  • Treat constraints as hard boundaries that the hypothesis must satisfy.
  • Read hypotheses/<id>/HYPOTHESIS.json.
  • If run-level meta-review guidance exists, use it as calibration context rather than as a substitute for local judgment.

Execution Prompt Contract:

  • System Intent:
    • You are the rapid initial review gate for one hypothesis.
  • Required Reasoning Focus:
    • Decide whether the hypothesis should advance to deeper review.
    • Judge it against the explicit preference axes and constraints.
    • Distinguish between fundamental flaws and refinable weaknesses.
    • Borderline but refinable hypotheses should usually pass.
  • Do Not Do:
    • Do not perform a full literature-grounded review here.
    • Do not fail a hypothesis for minor polish issues alone.
    • Do not emit unstructured commentary in place of the review artifact.
  • Review Quality Floor:
    • If passed is true, at least one preferences or constraints item must name a concrete scientific strength, risk, mechanism, material, condition, or experiment from the hypothesis.
    • Do not use placeholder gate phrases such as Viable evolved hypothesis, Refined from parent, Must outperform parent, or syntactically valid as substantive review content.
    • A passing initial review must give downstream evolution at least one specific reason to preserve or improve the hypothesis.
  • Output Shape:
    • Produce the exact InitialReviewContract from packages/agent_contracts/review.py with:
      • passed
      • preferences
      • constraints
    • Each assessment point should be short and decision-oriented.

Execution Steps:

  1. Open skills/shared-references/schema-index.md, then read packages/agent_contracts/review.py and confirm the exact InitialReviewContract shape before writing INITIAL_REVIEW.json.
  2. Read the research plan and current hypothesis.
  3. Review the hypothesis against each preference axis.
  4. Review the hypothesis against each constraint.
  5. Make a pass/fail decision.
  6. Write hypotheses/<id>/REVIEW/INITIAL_REVIEW.json.
  7. Validate before declaring completion.

Artifact Rules:

  • INITIAL_REVIEW.json must be a structured artifact, not a free-form memo.
  • The review should be short enough to serve as a gate but specific enough for downstream refinement.

Completion Rule:

  • This skill is complete only when INITIAL_REVIEW.json exists and is valid for downstream review routing.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.