Individual skill
psychrev-boundary-conditions
Use when setting the scope of a Psychological Review theory — what it explains, what it does NOT, and (for formal models) whether its parameters are identifiable. Bounds the theory; it does NOT derive its predictions (psychrev-argument-development) or frame its advance over rivals (psychrev-contribution-framing).
Psychological-Review-Skills/skills/psychrev-boundary-conditions/SKILL.md
Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- Last checked
- Nov 9, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 1,411
- Repository last updated
- Sep 27, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- academic-writing Repository topic
- agent-skills Repository topic
- journal Repository topic
- academic-research Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- anthropic Repository topic
- awesome-list Repository topic
- claude Repository topic
- claude-code Repository topic
- economics Repository topic
- engineering Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 4,495 bytes
Read excerpt
# Boundary Conditions, Scope & Identifiability (psychrev-boundary-conditions)
## When to trigger
- Your theory reads as if it explains everything (a red flag to reviewers)
- You have not said where the theory stops holding
- For a formal model: you have not checked whether distinct parameter settings are distinguishable
- A reviewer will ask "what would falsify this?" or "can you even estimate that parameter?"
## Why scope is a contribution, not a confession
At Psychological Review, stating where a theory holds and where it fails is part of the theory
itself, not a limitations paragraph tacked on at the end. A theory that "explains everything"
explains nothing — unbounded scope signals an unfalsifiable model. Editors read explicit