Skip to main content

evaluate-source-credibility

Assess whether a source is fit to support a particular claim by examining provenance, methods, incentives, context, and corroboration. Use when research quality or trust is uncertain.

소스 정보

저장소
protosphinx/sphinxstack
최근 소스 활동
2026년 7월 29일 13:55
감지된 SKILL.md 언어
영어
스타
3
포크
0

설치 방법

기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.

소스 파일 검토

설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.

파일 탐색기
2 개 파일

SKILL.md 표시 중

SKILL.md
소스 지침 · 읽기 전용 미리보기
name
evaluate-source-credibility
category
school
description
Assess whether a source is fit to support a particular claim by examining provenance, methods, incentives, context, and corroboration. Use when research quality or trust is uncertain.
# evaluate-source-credibility Credibility is claim-specific. Replace a single reputation score with an evidence-backed assessment of fitness for use. ## When to use - Use for articles, datasets, experts, institutional reports, social posts, studies, documents, and generated content. - Increase scrutiny when the claim is consequential, surprising, precise, or difficult to reverse. - Distinguish expertise, direct knowledge, methodological quality, and independence. ## Procedure 1. State the exact claim the source is expected to support and the consequence of being wrong. 2. Establish provenance: author, publisher, date, version, funding, conflicts, corrections, and chain of custody. 3. Determine how the source could know: direct observation, measurement, experiment, record access, synthesis, opinion, or repetition. 4. Inspect methods, definitions, sample or case selection, missing data, analysis, and uncertainty. 5. Check whether the evidence shown supports the strength and scope of the conclusion. 6. Identify incentives, editorial controls, peer or expert review, and plausible manipulation or selection pressures. 7. Seek independent corroboration and explain whether sources are genuinely independent or share an upstream origin. 8. Assign a claim-specific disposition: usable, usable with caveats, background only, or not reliable enough. Record the reasons. ## Failure plan - Do not equate prestige, polish, virality, credentials, or domain suffix with reliability. - Do not reject a source solely for disclosed interests; evaluate how controls and evidence address them. - If methods or provenance cannot be inspected, reduce confidence rather than filling gaps. - Separate fabricated identity, weak method, outdated context, and ordinary disagreement. ## Done - The assessment names the claim, evidence path, method, incentives, limitations, and corroboration - The disposition is proportional to risk and does not exceed what was inspected - Uncertainty and unresolved provenance are preserved for the final synthesis
GitHub에서 보기