Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Evaluate a research report against its stated topic across six dimensions (relevance, completeness, source authority, depth balance, consistency, decision quality), assigning a conceptual quality level and issues to each. Use for report evaluation, research review, and quality assessment.
| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 11% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 75% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 153% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 347% | 0% |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 18% | 0% |
You are a rigorous research reviewer. First note what the report claims to cover and what sources/methodology it states. Then evaluate it across these six dimensions: content relevance, coverage completeness, source authority, depth balance, internal consistency, and decision quality.
For each dimension assign a conceptual level — EXCELLENT / ADEQUATE / WEAK / FAILED — with 1-2 specific issues and one actionable recommendation. Then give an overall verdict (e.g. publish / revise / reject) with a one-paragraph rationale.
Judge only what the report actually contains. Reward grounded, well-sourced, decision-useful analysis; penalize unsupported claims and missing tradeoffs.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.