brycewang-stanford/devils-advocate
skills/12-pedrohcgs-claude-code-my-workflow/dot-claude/skills/devils-advocate/SKILL.md
Challenge slide design with 5-7 pedagogical questions. Checks ordering, prerequisites, and cognitive load.
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research devils-advocateInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: Apr 15, 2026, 10:08 AM7.1s1 file scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- devils-advocate
- description:
- Challenge slide design with 5-7 pedagogical questions. Checks ordering, prerequisites, and cognitive load.
- argument-hint:
- [Lecture filename]
- allowed-tools:
- ["Read", "Grep", "Glob"]
Devil's Advocate Review
Critically examine a slide deck and challenge its design with 5-7 specific pedagogical questions.
Philosophy: "We arrive at the best possible presentation through active dialogue."
Setup
- Read the target file (the lecture being challenged)
- Read the knowledge base in
.claude/rules/for notation conventions and narrative arc - If applicable, read adjacent lectures for narrative continuity
Challenge Categories
Generate 5-7 challenges from these categories:
1. Ordering Challenges
"Could students understand this better if we showed X before Y?"
2. Prerequisite Challenges
"Do students have the background for this notation at this point?"
3. Gap Challenges
"Should we include an intuitive example before this formal proof?"
4. Alternative Presentation Challenges
"Here are 2 other ways to visualize/present this concept."
5. Notation Conflict Challenges
"This symbol conflicts with earlier lecture usage."
6. Cognitive Load Challenges
"This slide has too many new symbols. Can we split?"
7. Book Vision Challenges
"If this becomes a book chapter, does this section stand alone?"
Output Format
# Devil's Advocate: [Lecture Title]
## Challenges
### Challenge 1: [Category] — [Short title]
**Question:** [The specific pedagogical question]
**Why it matters:** [What could go wrong]
**Suggested resolution:** [Specific action]
**Slides affected:** [Numbers or titles]
**Severity:** [High / Medium / Low]
[Repeat for 5-7 challenges]
## Summary Verdict
**Strengths:** [2-3 things done well]
**Critical changes:** [0-2 changes before teaching]
**Suggested improvements:** [2-3 nice-to-have changes]
Principles
- Be specific: Reference exact slides and notation
- Be constructive: Every challenge has a suggested resolution
- Be honest: If the deck is good, say so
- Prioritize: Notation conflicts > missed metaphors
- Think like a student: Where do they get lost?
Related Skills
brycewang-stanford/thematic-analysis
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Conduct rigorous thematic analysis (TA) of qualitative data following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase framework. Use whenever the user mentions 'thematic analysis', 'TA', 'Braun and Clarke', 'qualitative coding', 'identifying themes', or asks for help analysing interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses, or transcripts to identify patterns. Also trigger for questions about inductive vs theoretical coding, semantic vs latent themes, essentialist vs constructionist epistemology, building a thematic map, or writing up a qualitative findings section. Covers all six phases, the four upfront analytic decisions, the 15-point quality checklist, and the five common pitfalls. Produces a Word document write-up and an annotated thematic map. Does NOT cover IPA, grounded theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, or narrative analysis — use a different method for those.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026
brycewang-stanford/slr-prisma
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Guide users through writing a systematic literature review (SLR) following the PRISMA 2020 framework. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'systematic review', 'systematic literature review', 'SLR', 'PRISMA', 'PRISMA 2020', 'PRISMA flow diagram', 'PRISMA checklist', or asks for help writing, structuring, or auditing a literature review that follows reporting guidelines. Also trigger when the user asks about inclusion/exclusion criteria for a review, search strategies for databases like Scopus/WoS/PubMed, study selection processes, risk of bias assessment, or narrative synthesis for a review paper. This skill covers the full PRISMA 2020 checklist (27 items), produces a Word document manuscript in strict journal article format, generates an annotated PRISMA flow diagram, and enforces APA 7th Edition referencing throughout. It does NOT cover meta-analysis or statistical pooling. By Chuah Kee Man.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026
brycewang-stanford/running-placebo-analysis
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Performs placebo-in-time sensitivity analysis with hierarchical null model and optional Bayesian assurance. Use when checking model robustness, verifying lack of pre-intervention effects, or estimating study power.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026
brycewang-stanford/running-causalpy-experiments
data-ai
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Fit, summarize, plot, and interpret a chosen CausalPy experiment. Use after the causal method has been selected, including when configuring PyMC/sklearn models and scale-aware custom priors.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026