Individual skill

analysis-report

Writes the trace and report for an analysis whose output a reader will judge, restating the question with its binding clauses, recording data provenance, the method with every parameter that matters, results with raw and adjusted numbers and uncertainty, the checks performed, limitations, a decision log of alternatives considered and why they were rejected, and the exact commands that reproduce every number, using the Markdown skeleton included here. Use when delivering any quantitative analysis, model comparison, data audit or computational experiment to a person who did not watch the work; use paper-writing for manuscripts and ml-paper-writing for machine-learning papers.

backend/cli/skills/core/analysis-report/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit a08e0ad0ad3d6448123039ee4659163eb2e35d99

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
Yes
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
No
Observed behavior
Network or broad shell
Last checked
Nov 2, 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)
4,353
Repository last updated
Nov 6, 2026
License
Apache-2.0

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# Analysis report

The reader did not watch you work and will decide whether to trust the number. The report
has to let them confirm you answered the question actually asked, see every choice that
could have moved the result, and rerun it without asking you anything.

## Rules

1. **The request's specification is the primary analysis.** A grouping rule the request
   states (a median split, a tertile, a named marker), a named tissue, timepoint,
   population, comparison arm, test, threshold or output is what is computed first and
   reported first, exactly as written, on exactly the population named. Your better
   method is welcome: it is run as well and reported as a sensitivity analysis beside
   the requested one, never in its place. Substituting the "right" method for the