rationale-selection
Skill1 starsChanged 3 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Select the minimal set of 1-3 verbatim sentences from a candidate paper/abstract sufficient to entail or refute an atomic claim (SciFact's rationale-selection step). Use this after claim-writing has produced an atomic claim, as the evidence-gathering step before claim-label-prediction; an empty rationale set is a valid outcome, not an error.
In this repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- acu-nugget-recallSkill
- argumentative-zoningSkill
- atomic-unit-matchingSkill
- atomic-unit-recall-aggregateSkill
- atomic-unit-writingSkill
- claim-label-predictionSkill
- claim-writingSkill
- domain-level-judgmentSkill
- dual-column-self-checkSkill
- engineering-config-gradingSkill
- first-pass-skimSkill
- keshav-three-passSkill
- multi-stage-cascade-extractionSkill
- paper-fetchSkill
- qalmriSkill
- qalmri-worksheetSkill
- qasper-evidence-qaSkill
- quality-appraisal-checklistSkill
- question-framingSkill
- reforms-gradingSkill
- reporting-standard-checklistSkill
- reproducibility-third-party-verificationSkill
- research-question-appraisalSkill
- rhetorical-structure-qualitySkill
- second-pass-graspSkill
- signalling-question-answeringSkill
- star-awardingSkill
- study-design-tool-gateSkill
- sum-threshold-scoringSkill
- template-slot-fillingSkill
- third-pass-deep-readSkill
- unit-classificationSkill
- unit-segmentationSkill
- worst-case-lookupSkill
The file
Files
Rationale Selection
Selects minimal evidentiary sentence set for a claim — middle step of the SciFact 3-chain, added to close coverage-audit finding S7 (the original graph jumped straight from claim-writing to a three-way label judgment with no evidence-selection step, even though the tag table's own stated output anchor explicitly requires rationale sentences alongside the label).
Execution
Subagent — spawned via spawn-agent skill.
<!-- BEGIN available-tables (generated) -->Available SOPs
| SOP | When to use |
| spawn-agent | Spawn a customized CC subagent with full MCP tool access. |
<!-- END available-tables (generated) -->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.