
Analyze
- 8 installs
- 33 repo stars
- Updated April 26, 2026
- bighardperson/computer-science-skills-collection
analyze is a Claude Code skill that applies a structured, prioritized analysis pattern to any input to reach a sourced, actionable conclusion.
About
analyze is a skill that applies a structured analysis pattern to any input: data, code, text, decisions, or visuals. A developer uses it to force prioritization, mark each claim's source, seek disconfirming evidence, and end with an action rather than a summary. It supplies a Purpose-Structure-Analyze-Prioritize-Conclude pattern, per-domain focus tables, and named frameworks.
- Structured analysis pattern for data, code, text, decisions, or visuals
- Forces prioritization, sourcing of claims, and seeking disconfirmation
- Offers frameworks like MECE, pre-mortem, and steel man
Analyze by the numbers
- 8 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #2,242 of 3,280 Productivity & Planning skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Jul 30, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
Analyze capabilities & compatibility
Free; a prompting pattern with no external dependencies or API keys.
- Capabilities
- structured analysis · decision support · data analysis
- Use cases
- research · data analysis · planning
- Pricing
- Free
What Analyze says it does
Structured analysis for any input. Data, code, text, decisions, visuals. Prioritize, question, conclude.
Prioritize always**: 🔴 Critical (1-2 max) · 🟡 Important (2-3) · ⚪ Minor
Seek disconfirmation**: Dedicate space to "why I might be wrong"
npx skills add https://github.com/bighardperson/computer-science-skills-collection --skill analyzeAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 8 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 33 |
| Last updated | April 26, 2026 |
| Repository | bighardperson/computer-science-skills-collection ↗ |
What it does
Apply a structured, prioritized analysis pattern to data, code, text, decisions, or visuals.
Who is it for?
Turning raw inputs (data, code, text, decisions, visuals) into prioritized, disconfirmation-tested conclusions.
Skip if: Superficial paraphrasing; the skill flags that paraphrasing is not analysis.
When should I use this skill?
You need structured analysis of any input that must prioritize, question, and conclude.
What you get
A one-line purpose, ranked findings with sources, counter-evidence, and a recommended action.
- Prioritized findings with sources
- Counter-evidence section
- One-line recommendation
By the numbers
- 4 named frameworks (MECE, Pros/Cons+, Pre-mortem, Steel man)
- 3 priority tiers (Critical, Important, Minor)
Files
Pattern
Purpose → Structure → Analyze → Prioritize → ConcludeBefore analyzing: State what decision this serves. Pick a framework. Note first impression to challenge later.
Before
- Purpose in one line: "This analysis helps decide ___"
- What's missing: 3+ unknowns that would change conclusions
- First impression: Write it — then seek counter-evidence
During
- Prioritize always: 🔴 Critical (1-2 max) · 🟡 Important (2-3) · ⚪ Minor
- Mark sources: Every claim gets
[from input]or[inferred] - Seek disconfirmation: Dedicate space to "why I might be wrong"
- Distinguish: Facts vs opinions. Correlation vs causation.
After
- One-line summary: Force analysis into one sentence
- So what?: End with action, not summary
- Obviousness test: Would someone say this without reading? → Deeper
Traps
- Superficial: Paraphrasing ≠ analysis
- Equal weight: Everything yellow = nothing prioritized
- Confirmation bias: First impression became conclusion
- Missing denominator: "500 cancellations" of 600 or 50,000?
- Invented data: Stats without source = hallucination
By Domain
| Domain | Focus | Watch |
|---|---|---|
| Data | Grain, missing, outliers | Centinels, mixed types |
| Code | Production breaks, dead code | Style ≠ bugs |
| Text | Thesis, evidence strength | Unsourced claims |
| Decisions | Unlisted options, reversibility | Status quo bias |
| Visual | Dominance, consistency | Platform conventions |
Frameworks
Pick one before starting:
- MECE: Mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive
- Pros/Cons+: Add reversibility + cost of inaction
- Pre-mortem: Assume failure — why?
- Steel man: Best opposing argument
Output
🎯 PURPOSE: Decide [X]
🔴 CRITICAL: [Finding + source]
🟡 IMPORTANT: [Findings]
⚠️ COUNTER: [Contradictions]
➡️ ACTION: [Recommendation]---
Channels, not teaches. Ensures prioritization, questioning, and conclusions.
{
"ownerId": "kn73vp5rarc3b14rc7wjcw8f8580t5d1",
"slug": "analyze",
"version": "1.0.0",
"publishedAt": 1770845593630
}{
"slug": "analyze",
"name": "Analyze",
"version": "1.0.0",
"installedAt": 1776152393805,
"source": "skillhub"
}Related skills
FAQ
What pattern does it follow?
Purpose then Structure then Analyze then Prioritize then Conclude.
How does it avoid bias?
It marks each claim's source, dedicates space to why it might be wrong, and challenges the first impression.