Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to u9401066/med-paper-assistant. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/master/.claude/skills/concept-validation/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/u9401066/med-paper-assistantWrote 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/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/concept-validation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/concept-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/concept-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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/concept-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/concept-validation.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00068 | $0.01149 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00575 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00230 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00115 |
Grade A, and why
concept-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 9d 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 — 102 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Concept Validation Skill
核心規則
- 寫任何草稿前必須通過
validate_concept()（除 concept.md 本身） - Novelty Score ≥ 75（3 輪皆須達標）才算通過
- 失敗時犀利回饋 + 給選項（直接寫？修正？用 CGU？）→ 禁止討好式回饋或自動改 NOVELTY
工具
| Tool | 用途 | 何時用 |
|---|---|---|
validate_concept |
完整 3 輪驗證 + novelty 計分 | 首次驗證、修改 concept 後 |
validate_concept_quick |
結構性快速檢查（不評分） | 草稿階段快速確認 |
validate_for_section |
針對特定 section 驗證 | 寫 Introduction/Methods 前 |
Novelty 評分標準
| 分數 | 意義 | 行動 |
|---|---|---|
| 90-100 | 高度創新，強賣點 | ✅ 直接寫 |
| 75-89 | 足夠創新 | ✅ 可寫，建議微調 |
| 60-74 | 創新不足 | ⚠️ 需修改 concept |
| <60 | 缺乏創新 | ❌ 必須重構或用 CGU |
各 Paper Type 驗證重點
| Paper Type | 必要元素 | 驗證重點 |
|---|---|---|
| original-research | Hypothesis, NOVELTY, Methods, SELLING POINTS | 假說可測、方法可行 |
| case-report | Case presentation, NOVELTY, Learning points | 罕見性或新見解 |
| review-article | Scope, NOVELTY, Framework | 新觀點或新整合 |
| meta-analysis | PICO, Search strategy, NOVELTY | 差異化分析角度 |
| technical-note | Innovation, NOVELTY, Clinical impact | 技術新穎性 |
| letter-to-editor | Key argument, NOVELTY | 觀點獨特性 |
| brief-communication | Key finding, NOVELTY | 發現重要性 |
concept.md 必要結構
# Research Concept
## Background（為什麼重要）
## 🔒 NOVELTY STATEMENT（創新點，不可刪弱）
## Research Question / Hypothesis
## Methods Overview
## 🔒 KEY SELLING POINTS（賣點，Discussion 必強調）
## Target Journal（選填）
🔒 保護內容規則
🔒 NOVELTY STATEMENT：不可弱化或刪除，全稿須體現🔒 KEY SELLING POINTS：Discussion 必須強調所有賣點- 違反 → Hook P5 阻止 commit
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 102 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A c4e03f8e7971
concept-validation is a skill published in the GitHub repository u9401066/med-paper-assistant (12 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 1,149 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
citation-manager
Format and manage citations — APA, MLA, Chicago, IEEE, and Vancouver styles with BibTeX export.
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.
peer-review
Review another author's manuscript, paper, thesis chapter, proposal, or preprint as an external reviewer. Use when asked to evaluate novelty, significance, gap-contribution fit, claim-evidence adequacy, methods, evaluation, overclaim risks, structure, writing, required revisions, or recommendation without rewriting…
revision-escalation
A revision-control guide for writing, coding, manuscripts, rebuttals, and restructuring work. It says to stop applying local edits after the same problem remains unresolved through three attempts and check the underlying requirements or structure.
author
Scaffold a conforming AI-layer artifact — a rule, skill, hook, agent, or output style — that already passes the format checks, then verify it. Use when adding any new AI-layer artifact — a shared one under .agents/ or a Claude-only one under .claude/ — so it matches the existing shape instead of drifting.
verify
Fact-check claims encountered during reading — dates, names, events, citations. Use when encountering historical facts or disputed claims.