questions
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Populate or update a project's docs/questions.md — the 3-5 policy-relevant research questions the project answers, each synthesizing evidence from multiple hypotheses. Use when the user wants to draft, update, or audit questions.md.
6 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ansvisor/ansvisortheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ai-search-guru/getcito-worlds-first-open-source-aio-aeo-or-geo-tooltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- VladTheProgrammer/claude-asimovtheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- RichardBray/skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 29, 2026
- dfrysinger/qrspi-plustheir own version, first seen Jun 19, 2026
- Ekajto/my-claude-skillstheir own version, first seen May 17, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use facts.
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.
ansvisorSkillfacts
Checks every draft against your approved brand facts.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 6
- ai-search-guru/getcito-worlds-first-open-source-aio-aeo-or-geo-tool★ 432same name
- ansvisor/ansvisor★ 233same name
- dfrysinger/qrspi-plus★ 37same name
- RichardBray/skills★ 5same name
- Ekajto/my-claude-skills★ 0same name
- VladTheProgrammer/claude-asimov★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository39 other files it gives its agents.
- anecdotesSkill
- backupSkill
- checkSkill
- cite-syncSkill
- dataSkill
- diariosSkill
- distill-styleSkill
- driveSkill
- dropboxSkill
- fetch-annotationsSkill
- findings-auditSkill
- findingsSkill
- gmailSkill
- handoffSkill
- howtoSkill
- hypothesisSkill
- iatSkill
- ideaSkill
- inboxSkill
- institutionsSkill
- literatureSkill
- llmkitSkill
- meetSkill
- memory-auditSkill
- new-pipelineSkill
- new-projectSkill
- nextSkill
- otterSkill
- outlookSkill
- referee-panelSkill
- siteSkill
- style-checkSkill
- style-reviewSkill
- style-reviseSkill
- tactiqSkill
- theorySkill
- validate-sectionSkill
- whatsappSkill
- zoomSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
14 rules. 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
11
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 20
Not a staging area for half-formed ideas (that's thinking.md)
- Distinctive: line 21
Not a list of descriptive queries ("what share of cases have X?")
- Distinctive: line 22
Not a restatement of hypotheses (those have their own doc)
- Distinctive: line 23
Not a research agenda (keep it to what THIS project answers)
- Distinctive: line 50
Do NOT read theory.md, literature.md, institutions.md unless a specific question's answer needs institutional context.
- Distinctive: line 80
Never renamed once created (same stability rule as H: slugs)
- Distinctive: line 98
Write for a non-specialist.
- Very specific: line 102
Update after each /connect-results (or equivalent) run that changes the evidence base for any relevant hypothesis.
- Distinctive: line 120
Read summary.md to identify the paper's core motivation.
- Distinctive: line 121
Read hypotheses.md to understand what's testable.
- Very specific: line 139
What to edit: Only the target question's Current working answer and Open sections.
- Distinctive: line 148
Every H: slug referenced in questions.md exists in hypotheses.md
- Distinctive: line 149
Every question has at least one hypothesis with evidence strength above "Not tested"
- Distinctive: line 154
No orphan questions (all hypotheses mapped to at least one question) — orphan hypotheses are fine (not every test maps to a big question)
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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.
Files
/questions — Populate docs/questions.md
Draft or maintain a project's docs/questions.md: the small set of
policy-relevant questions the research answers. Each question aggregates
evidence from multiple hypotheses and maintains a current working answer
that evolves as new results come in.
These are synthesis questions — the "so what?" that motivates the paper and frames the contribution. They sit above the hypothesis layer: hypotheses are testable predictions; questions are what the predictions collectively tell us.
What questions.md is NOT
- Not a staging area for half-formed ideas (that's
thinking.md) - Not a list of descriptive queries ("what share of cases have X?")
- Not a restatement of hypotheses (those have their own doc)
- Not a research agenda (keep it to what THIS project answers)
Arguments
/questions— infer project from CWD/questions <project-slug>— run against a specific project/questions --update <Q:slug> [--artifact <path>]— update one question's working answer after new evidence (e.g., from/connect-results)/questions --audit— check for stale answers, missing hypothesis refs, orphan questions with no tested hypotheses/questions --extend— propose a new question (requires justification)
Finding the workspace root
The workspace root contains CLAUDE.md alongside projects/, pipelines/,
ideas/, research/. If inside a project, search upward. $ROOT for paths;
$PROJ = $ROOT/projects/<slug>/.
What to read
$PROJ/CLAUDE.md— current focus$PROJ/docs/summary.md— the main research question (required)$PROJ/docs/questions.md— existing questions (if any; match template)$PROJ/docs/hypotheses.md— all hypotheses with evidence strengths$PROJ/docs/findings.md— empirical results (if exists)$PROJ/docs/reference/analysis-index.yaml— what's been tested (if exists)
Do NOT read theory.md, literature.md, institutions.md unless a specific question's answer needs institutional context. Questions synthesize from hypotheses, not from primary sources.
Entry template
Each question follows this structure:
### Q:<slug>: <Question in natural language?>
**Relevant hypotheses:** H:<slug1>, H:<slug2>, ...
**Current working answer:**
<2-5 sentences synthesizing what the tested hypotheses tell us.
Cite specific numbers from results. Note where evidence is strong
vs suggestive. Write as you would for a non-specialist.>
**Open:** <What remains untested or ambiguous. Reference specific
H: slugs with their status (not tested / queued / interpreted).>Conventions
Slugs
Each question has a stable slug prefixed with Q: (e.g.,
Q:does-favoritism-exist, Q:how-circumvented). Slugs are:
- Lowercase, hyphenated, 2-5 words
- Unique within the project
- Never renamed once created (same stability rule as H: slugs)
- Used for cross-referencing in analysis files, index tags, and prose
Scope
- Aim for around 5 questions per project. This is a soft limit — adding a 6th or 7th is fine if genuinely warranted, but each new question should pass the bar: "would a policymaker or seminar audience ask this?" If not, it's probably a hypothesis or a thinking.md note, not a research question.
- Questions must be answerable (at least partially) by the project's data and design. Aspirational questions belong in thinking.md.
- Questions should be policy-relevant or have clear "so what?" value. Pure mechanism questions ("through which channel?") are fine if the channel has policy implications.
Working answers
- Write for a non-specialist. No jargon, no regression notation.
- Cite specific numbers from results (coefficients, percentages).
- Be honest about uncertainty. "The evidence suggests..." not "We have shown..."
- Update after each
/connect-results(or equivalent) run that changes the evidence base for any relevant hypothesis. - Date-stamp is NOT needed — git history tracks when answers changed.
Relationship to other docs
- summary.md states the main research question in 1-2 sentences. questions.md decomposes it into answerable sub-questions.
- hypotheses.md contains the testable predictions. questions.md groups them and synthesizes their answers.
- findings.md records individual empirical results. questions.md interprets what they mean collectively.
- thinking.md holds open-ended speculation. When a thinking.md note matures into something the project can answer, it may become a question. Most won't.
Draft protocol (new file)
- Read summary.md to identify the paper's core motivation.
- Read hypotheses.md to understand what's testable.
- Identify 3-5 questions that a seminar audience or policymaker would ask, such that the hypotheses collectively address them.
- For each question: list the relevant H: slugs, draft a working answer from current evidence, note what's still open.
- Present the list to the user for confirmation before writing.
Update mode (--update Q:<slug>)
Surgical edit of one question's working answer. Triggered when new
evidence arrives (typically after /connect-results interprets a
returned analysis).
Minimal read set:
$PROJ/docs/questions.md— locate the target entry$PROJ/docs/hypotheses.md— read the updated hypothesis/hypotheses- The triggering analysis file (if referenced)
What to edit: Only the target question's Current working answer
and Open sections. Do not touch other questions.
Output: The edited questions.md plus a one-sentence summary of what changed in the working answer.
Audit mode (--audit)
Check without writing:
- Every H: slug referenced in questions.md exists in hypotheses.md
- Every question has at least one hypothesis with evidence strength above "Not tested"
- Working answers are consistent with current evidence strengths in hypotheses.md (e.g., don't claim "strong evidence" if all relevant hypotheses say "Moderate" or "Weak")
- No orphan questions (all hypotheses mapped to at least one question) — orphan hypotheses are fine (not every test maps to a big question)
Report findings as a bulleted list.
Integration with other skills
/connect-resultsshould suggest a/questions --updatewhen an interpreted result changes the evidence base for a question/nextproposal mode can reference open items in questions.md/hypothesis --updateshould note if the change affects a question's working answer
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
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.

