菜单
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.
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt；你也可以切换为直接命令，或下载本地副本。
决定是否安装前，请先阅读 SKILL.md，以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt；运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/AgentEra/Agently --skill research-report-evaluator命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地？可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
Minimal guidance-only Skill used by release-pinned compatibility examples.
Use for portfolio-facing stock risk briefs that separate market facts, interpretation, and non-investment-advice boundaries.
Use for market-entry or go-to-market memos that combine CRM evidence, competitive signals, and executive decision needs.
正在显示 SKILL.md
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | Research Report Evaluator |
| description | 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. |
| keywords | ["report evaluation","research review","quality assessment","rubric"] |
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.
