Identify gemstones using optical properties, physical tests, and inclusion analysis. Covers refractive index, specific gravity, pleochroism, spectroscopy indicators, and common simulant detection. Use when identifying an unknown gemstone, verifying a seller's claim about species identity, distinguishing natural stones from simulants or synthetics, building gemological literacy through structured observation, or identifying rough material before cutting to ensure safe handling.
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Um comando direto ignora o prompt de revisão. Verifique a origem antes de executá-lo.
Instruções da origem · Visualização somente leitura
name
identify-gemstone
locale
caveman-lite
source_locale
en
source_commit
82c77053
translator
Julius Brussee homage — caveman
translation_date
2026-04-24
description
Identify gemstones using optical properties, physical tests, and inclusion analysis. Covers refractive index, specific gravity, pleochroism, spectroscopy indicators, and common simulant detection. Use when identifying an unknown gemstone, verifying a seller's claim about species identity, distinguishing natural stones from simulants or synthetics, building gemological literacy through structured observation, or identifying rough material before cutting to ensure safe handling.
Note the body colour under daylight-equivalent lighting (5500-6500K)
Check for colour zoning by viewing through the stone from different angles
Assess transparency and luster — these narrow the candidate list immediately
Look for optical phenomena (star, cat's eye, play of colour)
Record any visible inclusions without magnification
Got: A complete visual profile including colour, transparency, luster, and any phenomena. This alone narrows candidates to a manageable shortlist.
If fail: If lighting is poor (yellowish indoor light), note the limitation. Daylight or daylight-equivalent bulbs are strongly preferred. Incandescent light shifts colour perception and can cause misidentification of colour-change stones.
Step 2: Physical Property Testing
Test measurable physical properties to narrow the identification.
Key Physical Properties:
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Property | Method |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Hardness (Mohs) | Scratch test against reference minerals |
| | or hardness pencils. CAUTION: Do NOT |
| | scratch faceted gemstones — use other |
| | tests instead for cut stones |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Specific gravity | Hydrostatic weighing: |
| (SG) | SG = weight in air / (weight in air - |
| | weight in water) |
| | |
| | Common SG values: |
| | Quartz: 2.65 |
| | Beryl: 2.68-2.74 |
| | Tourmaline: 3.02-3.26 |
| | Topaz: 3.53 |
| | Corundum: 3.99-4.01 |
| | Zircon: 4.60-4.73 |
| | CZ: 5.65-5.95 |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Heft | Does the stone feel heavier or lighter |
| | than expected for its size? |
| | CZ and zircon feel noticeably heavy |
| | Quartz and glass feel average |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
For rough material: test hardness using Mohs scale reference points
For cut stones: measure specific gravity using hydrostatic method
Assess heft — experienced handlers can distinguish CZ from diamond by weight alone
Note any cleavage planes visible on the surface
Got: Hardness range (for rough) or SG value (for cut stones) that differentiates between candidate species. SG is often the most powerful single diagnostic for cut stones.
If fail: If hydrostatic balance is unavailable, use the heft test as a rough guide. Stones that feel "too heavy for their size" likely have high SG (>3.5). If hardness testing would damage a cut stone, skip to optical tests.
Step 3: Optical Tests
Apply gemological optical instruments for definitive properties.
Optical Property Tests:
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Test | What It Reveals |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Refractive Index | Measured on refractometer with RI fluid |
| (RI) | Diagnostic for most species: |
| | Quartz: 1.544-1.553 |
| | Beryl: 1.577-1.583 |
| | Tourmaline: 1.624-1.644 |
| | Topaz: 1.609-1.617 |
| | Corundum: 1.762-1.770 |
| | Spinel: 1.718 |
| | Diamond: 2.417 (OTL on refractometer) |
| | CZ: 2.15 (OTL on refractometer) |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Birefringence | Difference between high and low RI |
| (BR) | Quartz: 0.009 |
| | Corundum: 0.008 |
| | Tourmaline: 0.018-0.020 |
| | Singly refractive: 0 (spinel, garnet, |
| | diamond) |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Pleochroism | Colour variation with crystal direction |
| (dichroscope) | Strong: tourmaline, tanzanite, iolite |
| | Moderate: corundum, topaz |
| | None: singly refractive stones |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Optic character | Singly refractive (SR), doubly |
| (polariscope) | refractive (DR), aggregate (AGG) |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| UV fluorescence | Long-wave and short-wave UV response |
| | Diamond: often blue (LWUV) |
| | Ruby: strong red (LWUV) |
| | Emerald: usually inert |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Chelsea filter | Transmits deep red and yellow-green |
| | Emerald (Cr): appears red/pink |
| | Aquamarine: appears green |
| | Blue synthetic spinel: appears red |
+--------------------+------------------------------------------+
Measure RI on refractometer — take both high and low readings for birefringence
Test pleochroism with dichroscope — rotate slowly and note colour changes
Check optic character on polariscope (SR vs DR vs AGG)
Test UV fluorescence under both long-wave and short-wave
Use Chelsea filter if chromium-coloured stones are suspected
Got: RI value (to 0.001), birefringence, optic character, pleochroism description, and UV response. Combined with Step 2, this identifies most gemstone species definitively.
If fail: If RI is over-the-limit (OTL, >1.81), the stone is likely diamond, CZ, zircon (high-type), or a high-RI synthetic. Use SG and thermal conductivity to differentiate. If no refractometer is available, rely on SG + visual properties + inclusions.
Step 4: Inclusion Analysis
Examine internal features under magnification for species confirmation and natural vs. synthetic determination.
Examine the stone under darkfield illumination (gemological microscope) or oblique lighting through a 10x loupe
Look for species-diagnostic inclusions first
Check for synthetic indicators — curved striae and gas bubbles are definitive for flame-fusion synthetics
Note the inclusion type, location, and frequency
Photograph inclusions if possible for records
Got: Species-confirming inclusion pattern and natural/synthetic determination. Some species are identified more by their inclusions than by optical properties (e.g., emerald's jardin).
If fail: If the stone is eye-clean and no inclusions are visible at 10x, it may be a very clean natural stone or a synthetic. Lack of inclusions raises the synthetic probability — refer to optical and physical tests for confirmation. Laboratory analysis (FTIR, Raman) may be needed.
Step 5: Identification by Elimination
Cross-reference all collected data to reach a final identification.
Compile the property profile:
Colour + transparency + luster
Hardness or SG
RI + birefringence + optic character
Pleochroism + UV fluorescence
Inclusion pattern
Compare against reference tables for candidate species
Eliminate species that conflict with any measured property
If two or more candidates remain, identify the distinguishing test:
Example: blue topaz vs. aquamarine — SG is definitive (3.53 vs. 2.70)
State the identification with confidence level:
Definitive: Multiple properties confirm a single species
Probable: Properties consistent with one species, but one test missing
Uncertain: Conflicting data or insufficient testing — laboratory referral recommended
Got: A final species identification (e.g., "Natural sapphire, blue, heat-treated") with supporting evidence from each test category. Or a clear recommendation for laboratory analysis if field tests are insufficient.
If fail: If the stone cannot be identified with available equipment, document all measured properties and refer to a gemological laboratory. Provide the measured data to the lab — it accelerates their analysis.
Validation
Visual inspection completed under daylight-equivalent lighting
At least two physical properties measured (hardness/SG + one other)
RI measured and birefringence calculated (if refractometer available)
Pleochroism tested (if dichroscope available)
Inclusions examined under at least 10x magnification
Identification reached by systematic elimination, not assumption
Common simulants explicitly considered and ruled out
Natural vs. synthetic determination made (or flagged as uncertain)
Pitfalls
Trusting colour alone: Colour is the least reliable identification property. Blue stones include sapphire, topaz, aquamarine, tanzanite, iolite, spinel, glass, and CZ. Confirm with measurable properties
Skipping SG on mounted stones: Mounted stones limit testing, but you can still check RI, pleochroism, inclusions, and UV. Document the limitation rather than guessing
Confusing high-RI synthetics with naturals: Flame-fusion rubies and sapphires have identical RI and SG to natural stones. Only inclusions (curved striae vs. straight growth) differentiate them
Assuming expensive = natural: Commercial jewellery frequently contains treated, synthetic, or simulant stones. Test every stone regardless of provenance claims
Damaging the specimen: Never hardness-test a faceted gemstone — it will leave visible scratches. Use non-destructive tests (RI, SG, inclusions) for cut stones
Related Skills
cut-gemstone — Identification determines safe cutting parameters and orientation requirements for the species
appraise-gemstone — Positive identification is the prerequisite for any meaningful valuation
mineral-identification — Field mineral identification methodology using physical properties (prospecting domain) shares the systematic elimination approach
