problem-validation

problem-validation is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from EvoClaw/amplify. It costs 58 tokens per session (6,408 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A research checkpoint that challenges whether a proposed problem is worth pursuing before designing a method.

In plain words
What is it for?
It helps classify the project, test its originality, choose a realistic publication venue, and decide whether the work should proceed.
Why use it?
It exposes unclear goals, weak novelty, unsuitable publication targets, or projects that are not feasible before time and resources are spent.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one.

Good fit It helps classify the project, test its originality, choose a realistic publication venue, and decide whether the work should proceed.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/evoclaw/amplify/problem-validation
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Any agent
npx skills add EvoClaw/amplify --skill problem-validation
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/EvoClaw/amplify

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for problem-validation

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/evoclaw/amplify/problem-validation/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/evoclaw/amplify/problem-validation)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/evoclaw/amplify/problem-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/evoclaw/amplify/problem-validation/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for problem-validation

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/evoclaw/amplify/problem-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/evoclaw/amplify/problem-validation.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 58 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 6,408 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00058 $0.06408
Opus 5.5 $0.00023 $0.02563
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00012 $0.01282
Haiku 4.5 $0.00006 $0.00641

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 66044467e0a3, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

problem-validation scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

skills/problem-validation/SKILL.md · 591 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 591 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

"It's just data analysis, no need for validation" is the #1 reason Type D projects fail. DO NOT SKIP THIS PHASE.

Problem Validation (Phase 2)

Overview

A direction that survived Phase 1 is a candidate, not a commitment. This skill stress-tests the research problem through adversarial questioning before resources are invested. Passing this skill is required to enter method design.

Activation Flow

digraph problem_validation {
    "G1 Passed" [shape=doublecircle];
    "Pre-Step:\nKnown answer?\nUser-specified?" [shape=diamond, style=filled, fillcolor="#f0f0f0"];
    "Tell user &\noffer alternatives" [shape=box];
    "Novelty\nLitmus Test" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffe0e0"];
    "Multi-Agent\nDeliberation\n(up to 5 rounds)" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffe0e0"];
    "Converged?" [shape=diamond];
    "Escalation:\nUser decides" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ff9999"];
    "Project Intent\nClassification" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#e0e0ff"];
    "Venue Target\nPrecision" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#e0ffe0"];
    "Feasibility\nAssessment" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#fff0d0"];
    "All passed?" [shape=diamond];
    "Phase 3:\nMethod Design" [shape=doublecircle];
    "Return to\nPhase 1" [shape=doublecircle, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffcccc"];

    "G1 Passed" -> "Pre-Step:\nKnown answer?\nUser-specified?";
    "Pre-Step:\nKnown answer?\nUser-specified?" -> "Tell user &\noffer alternatives" [label="known answer"];
    "Pre-Step:\nKnown answer?\nUser-specified?" -> "Novelty\nLitmus Test" [label="proceed"];
    "Tell user &\noffer alternatives" -> "Novelty\nLitmus Test" [label="user chooses\nnew question"];
    "Novelty\nLitmus Test" -> "Multi-Agent\nDeliberation\n(up to 5 rounds)";
    "Multi-Agent\nDeliberation\n(up to 5 rounds)" -> "Converged?";
    "Converged?" -> "Project Intent\nClassification" [label="all PASS"];
    "Converged?" -> "Escalation:\nUser decides" [label="persistent FAIL\nor 5 rounds"];
    "Escalation:\nUser decides" -> "Return to\nPhase 1" [label="return to\nexploration"];
    "Escalation:\nUser decides" -> "Multi-Agent\nDeliberation\n(up to 5 rounds)" [label="try new\nformulation"];
    "Escalation:\nUser decides" -> "Project Intent\nClassification" [label="proceed\nas-is"];
    "Project Intent\nClassification" -> "Venue Target\nPrecision";
    "Venue Target\nPrecision" -> "Feasibility\nAssessment";
    "Feasibility\nAssessment" -> "All passed?";
    "All passed?" -> "Phase 3:\nMethod Design" [label="all ✅"];
    "All passed?" -> "Escalation:\nUser decides" [label="any ✗"];
}

Read the full file on GitHub · 591 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 591 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 66044467e0a3

Subscribe to this mod's changes

problem-validation is a skill published in the GitHub repository EvoClaw/amplify (11 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 6,408 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.