AgentSkillsCN

evidence-evaluator-skill

运用 CRAAP 测试与证据层级体系，科学评估信息来源的可信度与证据质量。

SKILL.md
--- frontmatter
name: evidence-evaluator-skill
description: Assess source credibility and evidence quality using CRAAP test and evidence hierarchies.

Evidence Evaluator Skill

Purpose

Assess source credibility and evidence quality using CRAAP test and evidence hierarchies.

Trigger Conditions

Keywords: "evaluate source", "is this credible", "check evidence", "study quality", "reliable source"

Procedure

Phase 1: CRAAP Test

C - Currency: How recent? R - Relevance: Fits the need? A - Authority: Qualified author? Reputable publisher? A - Accuracy: Verifiable? Sources cited? Peer-reviewed? P - Purpose: Why created? Bias present?

Score each: 0-5 (Weight: R=1.5x, A=2x, A=2x, others=1x) Total score / 37.5 = Credibility %

Phase 2: Evidence Hierarchy

Rank by epistemic strength:

  1. •Systematic reviews & meta-analyses (Highest)
  2. •Randomized controlled trials
  3. •Cohort studies
  4. •Case-control studies
  5. •Cross-sectional studies
  6. •Case reports
  7. •Expert opinion
  8. •Anecdote (Lowest)

Phase 3: Study Quality (if applicable)

  • •Design: Appropriate for question?
  • •Sample size: Adequate power?
  • •Bias: Selection, measurement, reporting?
  • •Confounds: Controlled?
  • •Statistics: P-values, effect sizes, CIs?
  • •Reproducibility: Replicable?

Phase 4: Verdict

  • •Credibility: 90-100% Highly credible / 70-89% Credible / 50-69% Questionable / <50% Not credible
  • •Use recommendation: ✅ Use / ✓ Use with caveats / ⚠️ Verify first / ❌ Don't use

Tool Access

Allowed: Read

Integration

Agent: evidence-evaluator Protocols: THINK-EVIDENCE-001 to 005

Example

Input: Blog post claiming "Coffee causes cancer"

Output:

  • •CRAAP: C=3, R=3, A=1 (no qualifications), A=1 (no sources), P=2 (clickbait) = 25% credible
  • •Hierarchy: Anecdote (lowest level)
  • •Actual evidence: WHO meta-analyses show coffee protective against several cancers
  • •Verdict: ❌ Don't use blog post, use systematic reviews instead