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.
npx skills add gyf9712/stat-theory-skills --skill theory-sharpengit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gyf9712/stat-theory-skillsWrote 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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/gyf9712/stat-theory-skills/theory-sharpen)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gyf9712/stat-theory-skills/theory-sharpen"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gyf9712/stat-theory-skills/theory-sharpen/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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gyf9712/stat-theory-skills/theory-sharpen"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gyf9712/stat-theory-skills/theory-sharpen.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00105 | $0.10976 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.05488 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.02195 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.01098 |
Grade A, and why
theory-sharpen 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 12d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 884 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Theory-Sharpen — Systematic Theoretical Improvement Assessment
🔬 Model Recommendation: Run this skill on Claude Opus for best results. Framework classification, assumption-relaxation analysis, and rate-sharpening all require deep mathematical reasoning. If your session is not on Opus, run
/model opusbefore invoking. Literature search and Codex cross-review will use Opus sub-agents.
Go beyond "is the proof correct?" to ask "can the theory be stronger, sharper, and better aligned with the model, the literature, and the experiments?"
Pipeline position:
/proofcheck → /proof-repair → /theory-sharpen → /proof-writer
Correct? Fix issues Improve theory Write new proofs
This skill can also run standalone on any paper with theoretical results.
Context: $ARGUMENTS
Core Philosophy
A good theory paper is evaluated on three axes:
- Strength: Are assumptions as weak as possible? Are rates as sharp as possible?
- Alignment: Does the theory match what the model actually provides and what the experiments actually test?
- Positioning: How does the result compare to the best known results in the literature?
This skill systematically audits all three axes and produces an actionable improvement roadmap.
Step 0: Ingest & Map the Theory-Model-Experiment Triangle
0A: Locate Inputs
Parse $ARGUMENTS. Accept:
- A
.texfile path → read directly - A paper directory → read
paper.tex+ any/proofcheckaudit if it exists - If
/proofcheckaudit exists, leverageassumption_ledger.md,theorem_inventory.md,dependency_graph.mdfor a head start
0B: Extract the Three Pillars
Read the paper and extract three structured inventories:
Pillar 1: Theory — What the theorems claim
| ID | Result | Assumptions used | Rate / bound | Constants | Regime | Location |
|---|
For each result, record:
- Exact assumptions (named + implicit)
- Convergence rate or bound (e.g., $O(n^{-1/2})$, $O_P(n^{-2/(2+d)})$)
- Whether rate is minimax, near-minimax, or suboptimal (if known)
- Sample size / dimension regime (e.g., $n \gg d$, $n \gg d^2$, fixed $d$)
- Constants: universal, dimension-dependent, problem-parameter-dependent?
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 884 lines · 105 tokens per session scan A 1da0622a4fd3
theory-sharpen is a skill published in the GitHub repository gyf9712/stat-theory-skills (9 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 105 tokens to every session and 10,976 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
did
Design, estimate, validate, and write up a difference-in-differences analysis, using the post-2018 heterogeneity-robust toolkit with an explicit statement of which parallel-trends assumption is imposed. TRIGGER on "difference-in-differences", "DiD", "TWFE", "event study", "staggered adoption", "parallel trends"…
iv
Design, estimate, validate, and write up an instrumental-variables analysis: single-instrument LATE designs, weak-instrument-robust inference, shift-share instruments, formula instruments that need recentering, and leniency (judge and examiner) designs estimated by UJIVE. TRIGGER on "instrumental variable", "IV"…
conjoint
Design, analyze, and write up conjoint experiments in both traditions: as randomized experiments identifying average marginal component effects, and as preference-measurement instruments (hierarchical Bayes partworths, WTP, choice-share simulation), with measurement-error correction, multiple-testing correction, and a…
research-talk
Author a Quarto reveal.js deck for a research talk: seminar, conference, job talk, brown bag. TRIGGER on "slides for my talk", "seminar deck", "job talk", "turn this paper into slides", "add an appendix slide", "export a handout". Classroom material is teaching-lecture; auditing an existing deck is slide-review.
field-experiment
Design, analyze, and write up randomized experiments (field experiments, A/B tests, RCTs): stratified and clustered designs, randomization inference, covariate adjustment done right, noncompliance, attrition and gated outcomes, treatment-effect heterogeneity, and interference. TRIGGER on "A/B test", "randomized…
preregister
Draft a registry-ready preregistration or preanalysis plan for AsPredicted, OSF, or the AEA RCT Registry. TRIGGER on "preregister", "draft a preregistration", "AsPredicted form", "OSF prereg", "AEA RCT registry", "PAP", "preanalysis plan", or before launching a vignette, conjoint, MTurk/Prolific, or field experiment.…