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 muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills --skill qualitative-reportinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/muhammad1438/academic-writer-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/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/qualitative-reporting)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/qualitative-reporting"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/qualitative-reporting/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/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/qualitative-reporting"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills/qualitative-reporting.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 | $0.00000 | $0.03661 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01831 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00732 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00366 |
Grade A, and why
qualitative-reporting 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 11d 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 — 380 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Qualitative Reporting
Qualitative research operates within a different paradigm from quantitative research — one that values depth over breadth, meaning over measurement, and context over control. Reporting qualitative research requires transparency about the research process, reflexive acknowledgment of researcher positionality, and demonstration of trustworthiness.
Qualitative vs. Quantitative Paradigm Overview
| Dimension | Quantitative | Qualitative |
|---|---|---|
| Ontology | Reality is objective and measurable | Reality is socially constructed, multiple |
| Epistemology | Researcher is separate from the studied | Researcher is part of the studied |
| Purpose | Test hypotheses, generalise, predict | Understand meaning, explore, generate theory |
| Methods | Surveys, experiments, structured observation | Interviews, focus groups, observation, documents |
| Sample | Large, representative, random | Small, purposive, theoretical |
| Analysis | Statistical testing | Thematic, narrative, discourse analysis |
| Quality | Reliability, validity | Trustworthiness, credibility |
| Reporting | CONSORT, STROBE | COREQ, SRQR |
Reporting Guidelines
COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research)
Purpose: 32-item checklist for health research.
When to use: Medical, nursing, public health, and clinical qualitative studies.
Key domains:
- Research team and reflexivity (8 items) — researcher credentials, experience, relationship with participants
- Study design (8 items) — methodology, sampling, sample size justification, data collection setting
- Analysis and findings (16 items) — coding, derivation of themes, participant checking, quotations
SRQR (Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research)
Purpose: General qualitative research in social sciences.
When to use: Psychology, sociology, education, and interdisciplinary qualitative studies.
Key domains:
- Title and abstract
- Problem formulation
- Purpose and research questions
- Methods
- Sampling and data sources
- Data collection and analysis
- Findings
- Discussion
- Ethics and trustworthiness
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 380 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 41288cfbe14e
qualitative-reporting is a skill published in the GitHub repository muhammad1438/academic-writer-skills (6 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 3,661 tokens. 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
thesis-control
Use when AI-assisted thesis or manuscript edits risk claim drift, scope creep, loss of intended use, experiment-role promotion, or repeated revisions that fail to converge; provides author-intent control, lightweight or strict contracts, drift audits, revision escalation, and human gates.
argument-governance
Build and audit the manuscript or research-project argument system across intended use, gaps, claims, data, results, experiment roles, contributions, innovation evidence, limitations, and contribution focus. Use when a paper, thesis chapter, review article, or research project needs an explicit argument map…
manuscript-reframe
Reframe report-like academic drafts into paper-form scientific arguments while preserving or explicitly renegotiating author intent; requires an approved old-versus-proposed spine, evidence and argument baselines, analysis-role control, and post-edit drift review.
audit
Check thesis chapters for consistency before submission — contradictory numbers, terminology drift, and broken cross-references.
self-review
Review the user's own manuscript, paper, thesis chapter, rebuttal, or release packet with clean-room anti-contamination controls and, when needed, an unfamiliar-reader comprehension gate. Use for internal review, readiness checks, reviewer simulation, or claim-evidence self-audit where prior chat memory and unstated…
evidence-review
Build evidence-controlled literature reviews and gap maps with source-status labels, claim registers, citation-role plans, traceability tables, and overclaim audits. Use when drafting or auditing review papers, thesis literature reviews, scoping reviews, or evidence syntheses where adjacent-domain evidence, candidate…