一键导入
reporting-and-archiving-findings
Use when an analysis is complete and verified, and you need to decide how to report it and archive the work for reproducibility
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。
菜单
Use when an analysis is complete and verified, and you need to decide how to report it and archive the work for reproducibility
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。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Use when starting any conversation - establishes how to find and use skills, requiring Skill tool invocation before ANY response including clarifying questions
You MUST use this before any data analysis or investigation - before exploring a dataset, loading or profiling data, running a model, computing a statistic, or testing an idea, and before any outcome data is touched
Use when you have an approved research question and need a concrete analysis plan, before touching outcome data or fitting any model
Use when facing 2+ independent investigations that can proceed without shared state - parallel literature survey, multi-dataset replication, or pre-specified robustness checks
Use when you have a pre-registered analysis plan to execute inline in this session with review checkpoints, on a platform without subagents
Use when a result is surprising, impossible, contradicts a sanity check, a pipeline fails, a model won't converge, or a replication fails - before adjusting anything
| name | reporting-and-archiving-findings |
| description | Use when an analysis is complete and verified, and you need to decide how to report it and archive the work for reproducibility |
Complete an investigation by confirming reproducibility, presenting clear options, handling the chosen one, and archiving everything needed to reproduce the result.
Core principle: Confirm reproducibility -> separate confirmatory from exploratory -> present options -> execute choice -> archive code + data + environment + pre-registration.
Announce at start: "I'm using the reporting-and-archiving-findings skill to complete this work."
Before reporting anything, confirm the whole analysis reproduces from immutable raw data with the fixed seed in the pinned environment.
# From a clean state: re-run the pipeline end to end
# Confirm headline numbers match what you intend to report
Use science-superpowers:verifying-results-before-claiming. If it doesn't reproduce, stop — fix reproducibility (possibly via science-superpowers:investigating-anomalous-results) before reporting. Don't report a number you can't regenerate.
GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON: normal repo, no worktree cleanup neededGIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON, named branch: worktree, provenance-based cleanup (Step 5)git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD master 2>/dev/null
Or ask: "This branch split from main — correct?"
Normal repo / named-branch worktree — present exactly these 4 options:
Analysis complete and reproducible. What would you like to do?
1. Merge the analysis back to <base-branch> locally
2. Write up and share (report / preprint / pull request)
3. Keep the branch as-is (I'll handle it later)
4. Discard this work
Which option?
Detached HEAD — present these 3 (no local merge):
Analysis complete and reproducible (externally managed workspace).
1. Push as a new branch and open a pull request / share
2. Keep as-is
3. Discard this work
Which option?
Don't add explanation — keep options concise.
MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
git checkout <base-branch> && git pull && git merge <feature-branch>
# Re-run the pipeline on the merged result; confirm it still reproduces
Then cleanup worktree (Step 6), then git branch -d <feature-branch>.
Produce the report (see "Report Content" below). If sharing via PR:
git push -u origin <feature-branch>
gh pr create --title "<title>" --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Question
<the research question>
## What was done
<the pre-registered analysis, and any documented deviations>
## Findings
<confirmatory results with effect sizes + intervals>
## Exploratory (not confirmatory)
<clearly separated leads>
## Reproducibility
- Pre-registration: <path/commit>
- Environment: <lockfile>
- Seed: <value>
- Re-run: <command>
EOF
)"
Do NOT clean up the worktree — it's needed for iteration on feedback.
Report: "Keeping branch . Worktree preserved at ." No cleanup.
Confirm first:
This will permanently delete:
- Branch <name>
- All commits: <list>
- Worktree at <path>
Type 'discard' to confirm.
Wait for the exact word. Then cleanup worktree (Step 6) and git branch -D <feature-branch>.
Only for Options 1 and 4. Options 2 and 3 preserve the worktree.
WORKTREE_PATH=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON: normal repo, nothing to clean up..worktrees/, worktrees/, or ~/.config/superpowers/worktrees/: we own it.
MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
git worktree remove "$WORKTREE_PATH"
git worktree prune
Every report MUST:
Whatever the option, ensure the archive contains everything needed to regenerate the result:
Never:
Always: