rigor-reviewer

Name: rigor-reviewer
Availability: InStock
Author: ARA-Labs

Evaluate research artifacts across six epistemic quality dimensions.

594|52|Updated Mar 27, 2026

Search Tags:#quality assurance #semantic analysis #research integrity #ARA #epistemic review

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/ARA-Labs/Agent-Native-Research-Artifact --skill rigor-reviewer-ara-labs

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: rigor-reviewer
Source: https://github.com/ARA-Labs/Agent-Native-Research-Artifact/tree/main/skills/rigor-reviewer
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/ARA-Labs/Agent-Native-Research-Artifact --skill rigor-reviewer-ara-labs

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes scripts (resource) and references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill provides an objective review of Agent-Native Research Artifacts (ARA), ensuring their epistemic quality and supporting research integrity.

Core Features & Use Cases

Semantic Epistemic Review: Evaluates six dimensions of epistemic quality through semantic reasoning.
Scored Review: Produces a detailed review with strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions.
Use Case: Use this Skill to review an ARA artifact and receive a comprehensive assessment of its epistemic soundness.

Quick Start

Run the rigor-reviewer skill on the ARA artifact located at '/path/to/ara_artifact'.

Frequently Asked Questions about rigor-reviewer

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I review the epistemic quality of an Agent-Native Research Artifact?▼

Epistemic review evaluates research artifacts by analyzing six dimensions of epistemic quality: evidence relevance, falsifiability, scope calibration, argument coherence, exploration integrity, and methodological rigor through semantic reasoning.

How do I assess the methodological rigor and argument coherence of research artifacts?▼

You can assess methodological rigor and argument coherence by running a semantic analysis that scores the artifact across six epistemic dimensions, producing a detailed report with strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions.

Do I need Python to perform a semantic epistemic review on research artifacts?▼

Yes, you need a Python environment to perform the semantic epistemic review, as Python is required for the analysis and reporting processes that evaluate the artifact's epistemic soundness.

Can I get a scored review with specific strengths and weaknesses for my research artifact?▼

Yes, the semantic epistemic review produces a scored assessment that identifies specific strengths, weaknesses, and actionable suggestions for improving the research artifact's overall quality.

What is the best way to ensure exploration integrity and scope calibration in research outputs?▼

The best way to ensure exploration integrity and scope calibration is through an objective semantic review that evaluates these specific epistemic dimensions alongside evidence relevance and falsifiability.

What are the limitations of automated epistemic review for research integrity?▼

Automated epistemic review is limited to evaluating semantic and structural dimensions of research artifacts, requiring a valid Agent-Native Research Artifact and a Python environment to generate comprehensive assessments.