# Scholar Evaluation

Provide qualitative-first, evidence-traceable developmental review of scholarly works...

- Repository: https://github.com/K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer (2545 stars)
- Category: Writing
- License: MIT
- Last updated: 2026-10-31
- Runs scripts: yes, review before use

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer --skill scholar-evaluation -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer --skill scholar-evaluation -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer --skill scholar-evaluation -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer --skill scholar-evaluation -g -a gemini-cli -y`
Claude Code plugin marketplace: `/plugin marketplace add K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer`

## Description

Provide qualitative-first, evidence-traceable developmental review of scholarly works and audit low-stakes research-assessment rubrics with optional local quality controls. Never use for ranking people or consequential decisions.

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

# Scholar Evaluation

## Purpose

Provide developmental, evidence-traceable feedback on a **scholarly work**:
paper, draft, protocol, literature synthesis, or research idea. Use
qualitative judgment first. Optional scores only describe how submitted
evidence maps to a predeclared bounded rubric.

This skill also audits whether a low-stakes assessment process documents its
construct, provenance, rater quality, uncertainty, traceability, sensitivity,
fairness, accessibility, privacy, and human governance.

## Hard safety boundary

Never use this skill to automate, recommend, materially influence, or score:

- hiring, promotion, or tenure;
- admissions;
- grants or other funding;
- prizes, honors, or awards;
- discipline, dismissal, or sanctions; or
- any other high-impact personnel decision.

Never rank people. Never reduce a person to a composite score. Never infer
ability, character, integrity, protected traits, future performance, or worth.
A nominal human-in-the-loop does not remove this boundary.

If asked for a prohibited use, stop. Offer developmental comments on a
scholarly work or a process-only audit that does not process applications,
compare people, recommend an outcome, or advise a decision.

Do not issue publication-readiness, accept/reject, or “top-tier” judgments.

Read `references/responsible_assessment.md` before any organizational use.

## ScholarEval status

The referenced ScholarEval project is an **experimental
literature-grounded research-idea evaluation framework**, not validated
psychometrics.

The verified primary record is Moussa et al., *ScholarEval: Research Idea
Evaluation Grounded in Literature*, arXiv:2510.16234v2, revised 2026-02-28.
It reports a retrieval-augmented soundness/contribution framework, a
117-idea four-discipline dataset, coverage experiments, and a user study.

The rest: https://github.com/K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer/blob/HEAD/.claude/skills/scholar-evaluation/SKILL.md