agentleFS
Sign inStart free
cdeustcdeust/zetetic-team-subagents/skills/evidence-synthesis/SKILL.md

evidence-synthesis

Skill8 starsChanged 58 days agoMITView on GitHub

Turn a pile of sources into a defensible claim. Use for "what does the literature actually say?", conflicting studies or benchmarks, "is this result trustworthy?", arguments that need claim-evidence-warrant structure, qualitative data needing coding, or a theory with no catalog of its own contradicting evidence.

6 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use literature-review.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • JDerekLomasSkill

    literature-review

    Conduct comprehensive, systematic literature reviews using multiple academic databases (PubMed, arXiv, bioRxiv, Semantic Scholar, etc.). This skill should be used when conducting systematic literature reviews, meta-analyses, research synthesis, or comprehensive literature searches across biomedical, scientific, and technical domains. Creates professionally formatted markdown documents and PDFs with verified citations in multiple citation styles (APA, Nature, Vancouver, etc.).

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    If no shape above matches, use a built-in agent with the closest GENIUS: pattern from rules/agent-routes.json instead.

    line 45

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Evidence Synthesis

Problem shape: multiple sources (papers, benchmarks, interviews, texts) must be combined into one graded conclusion — and the current draft cherry-picks, skips heterogeneity, or has no explicit warrant connecting evidence to claim.

Relevant geniuses

AgentUse when
cochranestudies must be systematically found, graded, and pooled; publication bias suspected; effect sizes needed, not vote-counting
toulminan argument needs explicit claim-evidence-warrant structure with qualifiers and rebuttals; standards differ by field
feynmana result is suspiciously clean; a citation is used without the ability to rederive it; integrity audit before publishing
darwinevidence accumulates over a long horizon; the theory needs a difficulty book of its own contradictions; hardest case first
laplaceevidence must update a belief quantitatively — priors, likelihoods, calibration
gadamersources must be interpreted, not just counted — pre-understandings audited, the charitable reading found first
straussqualitative data (interviews, tickets, reviews) needs open/axial coding until saturation, not anecdote-picking
geertzthe evidence is behavior in context — thick description and emic vs etic separation before conclusions

Invocation

  1. Pick the best-fit agent above. If two or more fit, run tools/genius-invoker.sh route "<problem>" and take the top ranked match.
  2. Load it: tools/genius-invoker.sh invoke <agent> "<problem>", then read agents/genius/<agent>.md in full.
  3. Apply the agent's <workflow> step by step and answer in its <output-format>. Every synthesized claim carries its evidence grade and its strongest known counter-evidence (coding-standards §8: no source, no claim).
  4. Typical chain: cochrane grades the corpus → toulmin structures the argument → feynman audits the integrity. Run via tools/genius-invoker.sh compose cochrane toulmin -- "<problem>".
  5. If no shape above matches, use a built-in agent with the closest GENIUS: pattern from rules/agent-routes.json instead.

Refuse when

  • The conclusion is fixed in advance and only supporting sources are wanted.
  • Primary sources are unavailable and only summaries-of-summaries exist — say "I don't know" rather than synthesize hearsay.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

Check your setup, free