Skillquality 0.47

counterargument

Generates rigorous devil's advocate critiques from methodological, theoretical, and practical perspectives. Use when the user asks to challenge their own work, find weaknesses, stress-test assumptions, anticipate reviewer objections, or argue against their research claims. Run BE

Price
free
Protocol
skill
Verified
no

What it does

Counterargument Generation

Generate adversarial critiques to stress-test research claims before writing or submitting.

Perspectives

PerspectiveIconFocus
Methodological๐Ÿ”ฌStudy design, measurement validity, statistical approach, reproducibility
Theoretical๐Ÿ“šConceptual framework, alternative explanations, literature gaps
Practicalโš™๏ธFeasibility, generalizability, real-world applicability, ethical concerns

Workflow

  1. Identify the core claims โ€” extract the main hypotheses or arguments
  2. Generate 4โ€“6 critiques โ€” at least one per perspective, more for weaker claims
  3. Rate severity โ€” HIGH (fatal flaw), MEDIUM (significant concern), LOW (minor point)
  4. Provide rebuttal strategy โ€” for each critique, suggest how to respond or strengthen the research

Output Format

# โš”๏ธ Counterargument Analysis

## Summary
[2โ€“3 sentences: overall assessment of the research's vulnerability to critique]

## Counterarguments

### ๐Ÿ“š Theoretical Critique โ€” [SHORT TITLE]

**Challenged Claim:** [Exact claim being challenged]

**Critique:** [Specific, evidence-grounded critique. Reference timescales, measurement limits,
alternative frameworks, or published contradictory evidence where possible.]

**Rebuttal Strategy:** [Concrete suggestion: what experiment, analysis, or argument would
address this critique]

---

### ๐Ÿ”ฌ Methodological Critique โ€” [SHORT TITLE]
...

Quality criteria

  • Specific: Reference exact claims, timescales, measurements โ€” not vague "this is uncertain"
  • Grounded: Connect to actual limitations in the content, not generic criticism
  • Expert-level: Write as a senior reviewer at a top journal would
  • Constructive: Every critique ends with a path forward (rebuttal strategy)

Examples of strong vs weak critiques

Weak: "The sample size might be too small."

Strong: "The proposed sample of n=15 animals achieves 80% power only for effect sizes of ฮทยฒโ‰ฅ0.25. Given the typical effect sizes in STDP studies (ฮทยฒ=0.10โ€“0.15, e.g., Bi & Poo 1998), this is underpowered. A power analysis targeting ฮทยฒ=0.12 would require n=38 per condition."

Capabilities

skillsource-richard-kim-79skill-counterargumenttopic-academictopic-agent-skillstopic-claudetopic-hypothesistopic-peer-reviewtopic-researchtopic-science

Install

Installnpx skills add richard-kim-79/archora-skills
Transportskills-sh
Protocolskill

Quality

0.47/ 1.00

deterministic score 0.47 from registry signals: ยท indexed on github topic:agent-skills ยท 37 github stars ยท SKILL.md body (2,206 chars)

Provenance

Indexed fromgithub
Enriched2026-05-18 18:58:32Z ยท deterministic:skill-github:v1 ยท v1
First seen2026-05-15
Last seen2026-05-18

Agent access