scope-challenge
Skill17 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Adversarial scope check — is this a paper, a footnote, or three papers? Four challenges force the contribution into one sentence and one table. Use when a project is sprawling, sections keep multiplying, the user cannot name the headline result, or asks whether to split a paper.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- unlockers-ai/unlockers-skills-librarytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- unlockers-ai/unlockers-skills-library★ 4same 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 repository38 other files it gives its agents.
- abstract-shotgunSkill
- analyzeSkill
- archiveSkill
- carefulSkill
- coauthor-reviewSkill
- codebookSkill
- cover-letterSkill
- data-acquireSkill
- data-cleanSkill
- design-researchSkill
- draft-sectionSkill
- freezeSkill
- guardSkill
- hypothesis-designSkill
- idea-shotgunSkill
- identification-reviewSkill
- journal-fitSkill
- learnSkill
- lit-mapSkill
- llm-checklistSkill
- mstack-initSkill
- mstack-upgradeSkill
- paper-statusSkill
- pdf-ingestSkill
- power-analysisSkill
- preregisterSkill
- r-and-rSkill
- referee-mockSkill
- research-questionSkill
- results-auditSkill
- retroSkill
- robustnessSkill
- submission-packSkill
- survey-buildSkill
- theory-buildSkill
- title-shotgunSkill
- unfreezeSkill
- vizSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 42
Affirming a 60-page draft: If it does not fit a journal article, say so.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
/mstack:scope-challenge
Stage: ideate · Voice: adversarial-advisor
For the project that keeps growing: three interesting figures and no headline, a new section every week, a suspicion that this is two papers or an unfinishable one.
Procedure
Read .mstack/research-question.md, .mstack/lit-map.md, .mstack/theory.md if it exists, and every draft section in paper/sections/. Run the four challenges in order, one at a time in a live session and all four at once when the user is not in a live back-and-forth; write the results to .mstack/scope-challenge-<YYYY-MM-DD>.md.
- One sentence. "State the contribution in one sentence with no clauses." If the user cannot, the scope is wrong; push until they can.
- One table. "Which single table is the paper? Which figure is the cover?" Political science papers are built around 1–2 tables and 1–2 figures; four "essential" tables means two belong in another paper or an appendix.
- Cleavage test. "If you had to split this into two papers, where is the cut?" Finding the cut usually reveals one paper and one sketch. The sketch is for later.
- 3-month ship. "What would you cut to submit in 3 months?" That list is usually what should already be cut. Build the minimum viable paper.
Verdict:
- Tight — survives all four. Continue as is.
- Sprawl — one or more fail. Recommend a specific cut: a section, a table, an analysis branch.
- Multi-paper — the cleavage test reveals two contributions. Recommend the split and which half is paper one.
Soft verdicts produce sprawling papers; be opinionated.
Outputs
.mstack/scope-challenge-<date>.md— challenges, answers, verdict.- Summary block: verdict + the single most important cut.
Anti-patterns
- Affirming a 60-page draft. If it does not fit a journal article, say so.
- "Both papers are great." Pick one; the other is next year's.
Next
Sprawl → re-run /mstack:research-question on the trimmed project. Multi-paper → /mstack:mstack-init a sibling folder for paper two.
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.