How do I install the Research Gap Visualizer skill?

Run npx skillmds add majiayu000/research-gap-visualizer in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Research Gap Visualizer safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. Capability flags: docs only. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Research Gap Visualizer?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Research Gap Visualizer free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Research Gap Visualizer?

majiayu000 (@majiayu000) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Research Gap Visualizer by majiayu000

Name: Research Gap Visualizer
Rating: 4.5 (4 reviews)
Author: majiayu000

File contents

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE

Purpose

Map what is known vs. unknown for a research topic and highlight actionable gaps.
Use constraint hygiene and explicit confidence ceilings to avoid overclaiming coverage.
Preserve structure-first artifacts (SKILL, README, references, examples).

Trigger Conditions

Positive: planning literature reviews, prioritizing experiments, or aligning stakeholders on open questions.
Negative: pure synthesis without visualization (use literature-synthesis) or execution planning (interactive-planner).

Guardrails

Constraints captured in HARD / SOFT / INFERRED buckets (scope, domains, timelines, exclusion criteria).
Two-pass refinement: initial gap map → epistemic validation with evidence strength and conflicts.
Each gap lists required evidence and confidence ceiling for current assessment.

Inputs

Research question or topic; inclusion/exclusion criteria.
Existing sources and their quality.
Desired visualization format (table, bullet map, graph description).

Workflow

Scope & Constraints: Define boundaries and bucket constraints; confirm INFERRED assumptions.
Evidence Inventory: Catalog sources, claims, and confidence ceilings; mark conflicts.
Gap Mapping: Identify unaddressed questions, weak evidence areas, and dependencies.
Validation Pass: Check coverage vs. constraints; ensure gaps have clear evidence needs and owners.
Deliver & Store: Produce gap map plus recommendations; update references/examples.

Validation & Quality Gates

Gaps trace back to constraints and evidence inventory.
Conflicts and weaknesses called out with ceilings.
Recommended next steps/owners attached to each gap.

Response Template

**Scope & Constraints**
- HARD / SOFT / INFERRED.

**Coverage Snapshot**
- What is known (source → confidence).
- Conflicts.

**Gaps**
- Gap → evidence needed → owner/next step → confidence ceiling.

Confidence: 0.78 (ceiling: inference 0.70) - based on current evidence inventory.

Confidence: 0.78 (ceiling: inference 0.70) - reflects validated gap mapping against available evidence.

---name: research-gap-visualizerdescription: Identify and visualize research gaps, coverage, and conflicts with explicit constraints and evidence.--- ## STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE ### Purpose - Map what is known vs. unknown for a research topic and highlight actionable gaps. - Use constraint hygiene and explicit confidence ceilings to avoid overclaiming coverage. - Preserve structure-first artifacts (SKILL, README, references, examples). ### Trigger Conditions - **Positive:** planning literature reviews, prioritizing experiments, or aligning stakeholders on open questions. - **Negative:** pure synthesis without visualization (use `literature-synthesis`) or execution planning (`interactive-planner`). ### Guardrails - Constraints captured in HARD / SOFT / INFERRED buckets (scope, domains, timelines, exclusion criteria). - Two-pass refinement: initial gap map → epistemic validation with evidence strength and conflicts. - Each gap lists required evidence and confidence ceiling for current assessment. ### Inputs - Research question or topic; inclusion/exclusion criteria. - Existing sources and their quality. - Desired visualization format (table, bullet map, graph description). ### Workflow 1. **Scope & Constraints**: Define boundaries and bucket constraints; confirm INFERRED assumptions. 2. **Evidence Inventory**: Catalog sources, claims, and confidence ceilings; mark conflicts. 3. **Gap Mapping**: Identify unaddressed questions, weak evidence areas, and dependencies. 4. **Validation Pass**: Check coverage vs. constraints; ensure gaps have clear evidence needs and owners. 5. **Deliver & Store**: Produce gap map plus recommendations; update references/examples. ### Validation & Quality Gates - Gaps trace back to constraints and evidence inventory. - Conflicts and weaknesses called out with ceilings. - Recommended next steps/owners attached to each gap. ### Response Template ``` **Scope & Constraints** - HARD / SOFT / INFERRED. **Coverage Snapshot** - What is known (source → confidence). - Conflicts. **Gaps** - Gap → evidence needed → owner/next step → confidence ceiling. Confidence: 0.78 (ceiling: inference 0.70) - based on current evidence inventory. ``` Confidence: 0.78 (ceiling: inference 0.70) - reflects validated gap mapping against available evidence.

Frequently asked questions