Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Tactic: Extract causal claims, evaluate probability of necessity (PN) and sufficiency (PS) for each, classify into necessity-sufficiency quadrants.
.claude/skills/yogsoth-ai-causal-necessity-testing/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 70% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 152% | 0% |
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -33% | 0% |
| case-11 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -21% | 0% |
| case-18 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 65% | 0% |
PNS evaluation: for each causal claim, determine whether the cause is necessary, sufficient, both, or neither.
<!-- BEGIN available-tables (generated) -->
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use | | --- | --- | | causal-claim-extraction | Extract all causal claims (X causes Y, X leads to Y, X enables Y) from an artifact, producing a structured list of cause-effect pairs. | | load-bearing-identification | Identify which factors are "load-bearing walls" — factors whose removal would collapse the conclusion. | | necessity-evaluation | Evaluate the probability of necessity (PN) for a causal factor — would the conclusion fail if this factor were absent? | | sufficiency-evaluation | Evaluate the probability of sufficiency (PS) for a causal factor — would this factor alone be enough to produce the conclusion? |
<!-- END available-tables (generated) -->
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→pass | 12,998 | 17,676 | +36% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,160 | 3,674 | +70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 11,366 | 23,103 | +103% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,878 | 4,729 | +152% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | 12,372 | 5,083 | -59% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,048 | 1,381 | -33% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | 7,020 | 3,434 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,140 | 1,236 | +8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | 8,347 | 2,495 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,425 | 886 | -38% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 4,862 | 3,762 | -23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 898 | 1,229 | +37% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 7,557 | 2,448 | -68% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,374 | 1,036 | -25% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 8,609 | 4,609 | -46% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,417 | 1,432 | +1% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 9,719 | 2,607 | -73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,554 | 999 | -36% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 10,750 | 3,421 | -68% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,681 | 1,072 | -36% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 13,109 | 3,668 | -72% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,172 | 1,161 | -47% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 9,722 | 3,666 | -62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,482 | 1,174 | -21% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 17,952 | 3,540 | -80% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,367 | 1,064 | -22% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | 8,393 | 2,515 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,433 | 973 | -32% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→fail | 8,844 | 2,593 | -71% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,401 | 991 | -29% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 8,489 | 7,249 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,409 | 1,692 | +20% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 17,294 | 15,823 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,866 | 2,860 | -0% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 5,382 | 5,859 | +9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 908 | 1,497 | +65% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | 10,843 | 6,898 | -36% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,706 | 1,877 | +10% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 3,565 | 9,500 | +166% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 647 | 2,135 | +230% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→fail | 9,011 | 15,044 | +67% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,562 | 3,324 | +113% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 21,182 | 28,748 | +36% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,384 | 6,697 | +53% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +14 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases. 2 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.