Loading...
Loading...
Found 54 Skills
Detects fabricated content, false citations, and unverifiable claims in agent outputs. Uses source verification and consistency checking. Activate on 'detect hallucination', 'fact check', 'verify claims', 'check accuracy', 'find fabrications'. NOT for validation (use dag-output-validator) or confidence scoring (use dag-confidence-scorer).
Universal deep research agent team. 13-agent pipeline for rigorous academic research on any topic. 7 modes: full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, 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, 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, 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.
Side role: find and correct bad signals, earn leaderboard points per Publisher-approved correction (max 3/day)
Evaluate source credibility using primary/secondary classification, internal/external criticism, triangulation, and misinformation detection. Use this skill when the user needs to assess whether information is trustworthy, evaluate research sources, fact-check claims, or detect misinformation — even if they say 'can I trust this source', 'is this real', 'how reliable is this data', or 'fact-check this for me'.
Analyze arguments, detect biases, evaluate claims, and improve reasoning. Use when asked to fact-check, identify logical fallacies, evaluate arguments, analyze predictions, find root causes, or think adversarially about plans. Triggers include "evaluate this argument", "logical fallacies", "fact check", "analyze the claims", "identify biases", "devil's advocate", "red team this", "root cause".
Research topics, verify facts, check historical accuracy, and validate technical details. Use when writing non-fiction, historical fiction, or any content requiring factual accuracy.
Research topics with web search. Use when: researching a topic or concept, finding current information, answering factual questions, comparing options or technologies. Triggers: research [topic], find out about, what are the best practices for, research the latest on.
Extracts verifiable claims from ALL .md files (paths, versions, counts, configs, names, endpoints), verifies each against codebase, cross-checks between documents for contradictions.
Three-layer verification pipeline for AI output. Extracts verifiable claims, finds supporting or contradicting sources via web search, runs adversarial review for hallucination patterns, and produces a structured verification report with source links for human review.
Extract falsifiable ideas from input, deep-research each one, and return evidence for or against with strength ratings. Use when user says "find evidence for this", "is this true?", "back this up with data", or "fact-check these claims". Honest about when evidence contradicts the idea.
Fact-checks LLM responses by extracting verifiable claims, verifying each via web search, producing an audit report with verdicts, and optionally revising inaccurate responses. Use when the user asks to audit, fact-check, double-check, or verify a response.
A validation framework that ensures Claude's responses are current, accurate, complete, and clear. Use this skill whenever the user asks a factual or research question, requests analysis or recommendations (e.g., "What's the best framework for X?", "Compare options for Y"), or any prompt where recency and accuracy matter. Also trigger when the user explicitly asks for validated, verified, or fact-checked answers. This skill should activate broadly — if the answer depends on facts that could have changed in the last few months, use it. Even questions that seem straightforward ("Is X still the recommended approach?") benefit from this skill's validation pipeline. Do NOT trigger for purely creative writing, casual chat, or tasks that are entirely opinion-based with no factual claims.