deep-reading-analyst
Uses structured thinking frameworks to analyze complex content, extract insights, and identify logical flaws.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/deep-reading-analyst && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/3702" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/deep-reading-analyst && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/deep-reading-analyst
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Comprehensive framework for deep analysis of articles, papers, and long-form content using 10+ thinking models (SCQA, 5W2H, critical thinking, inversion, mental models, first principles, systems thinking, six thinking hats). Use when users want to: (1) deeply understand complex articles/content, (2) analyze arguments and identify logical flaws, (3) extract actionable insights from reading materials, (4) create study notes or learning summaries, (5) compare multiple sources, (6) transform knowledge into practical applications, or (7) apply specific thinking frameworks. Triggered by phrases like 'analyze this article,' 'help me understand,' 'deep dive into,' 'extract insights from,' 'use [framework name],' or when users provide URLs/long-form content for analysis.Key capabilities
- →Applies thinking models like SCQA, 5W2H, and First Principles
- →Structures content analysis from quick to deep levels
- →Dissects logical flaws and arguments in long-form text
- →Synthesizes information across multiple sources
How it works
Iterates through a pre-defined framework selection tree, prompting the user for depth requirements before applying logic models to the input text.
Inputs & outputs
When to use deep-reading-analyst
- →Analyzing research papers for insights
- →Summarizing complex technical articles
- →Comparing multiple source arguments
- →Applying mental models to content
About this skill
Deep Reading Analyst
Transforms surface-level reading into deep learning through systematic analysis using 10+ proven thinking frameworks. Guides users from understanding to application through structured workflows.
Framework Arsenal
Quick Analysis (15min)
- 📋 SCQA - Structure thinking (Situation-Complication-Question-Answer)
- 🔍 5W2H - Completeness check (What, Why, Who, When, Where, How, How much)
Standard Analysis (30min)
- 🎯 Critical Thinking - Argument evaluation
- 🔄 Inversion Thinking - Risk identification
Deep Analysis (60min)
- 🧠 Mental Models - Multi-perspective analysis (physics, biology, psychology, economics)
- ⚡ First Principles - Essence extraction
- 🔗 Systems Thinking - Relationship mapping
- 🎨 Six Thinking Hats - Structured creativity
Research Analysis (120min+)
- 📊 Cross-Source Comparison - Multi-article synthesis
Workflow Decision Tree
User provides content
↓
Ask: Purpose + Depth Level + Preferred Frameworks
↓
┌─────────────────┬─────────────────┬─────────────────┬─────────────────┐
│ Level 1 │ Level 2 │ Level 3 │ Level 4 │
│ Quick │ Standard │ Deep │ Research │
│ 15min │ 30min │ 60min │ 120min+ │
├─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┤
│ • SCQA │ Level 1 + │ Level 2 + │ Level 3 + │
│ • 5W2H │ • Critical │ • Mental Models │ • Cross-source │
│ • Structure │ • Inversion │ • First Princ. │ • Web search │
│ │ │ • Systems │ • Synthesis │
│ │ │ • Six Hats │ │
└─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────┘
Step 1: Initialize Analysis
Ask User (conversationally):
- "What's your main goal for reading this?"
- Problem-solving / Learning / Writing / Decision-making / Curiosity
- "How deep do you want to go?"
- Quick (15min) / Standard (30min) / Deep (60min) / Research (120min+)
- "Any specific frameworks you'd like to use?"
- Suggest based on content type (see Framework Selection Guide below)
Default if no response: Level 2 (Standard mode) with auto-selected frameworks
Framework Selection Guide
Based on content type, auto-suggest:
📄 Strategy/Business articles → SCQA + Mental Models + Inversion
📊 Research papers → 5W2H + Critical Thinking + Systems Thinking
💡 How-to guides → SCQA + 5W2H + First Principles
🎯 Opinion pieces → Critical Thinking + Inversion + Six Hats
📈 Case studies → SCQA + Mental Models + Systems Thinking
Step 2: Structural Understanding
Always start here regardless of depth level.
Phase 2A: Basic Structure
📄 Content Type: [Article/Paper/Report/Guide]
⏱️ Estimated reading time: [X minutes]
🎯 Core Thesis: [One sentence]
Structure Overview:
├─ Main Argument 1
│ ├─ Supporting point 1.1
│ └─ Supporting point 1.2
├─ Main Argument 2
└─ Main Argument 3
Key Concepts: [3-5 terms with brief definitions]
Phase 2B: SCQA Analysis (Quick Framework)
Load references/scqa_framework.md and apply:
## SCQA Structure
**S (Situation)**: [Background/context the article establishes]
**C (Complication)**: [Problem/challenge identified]
**Q (Question)**: [Core question being addressed]
**A (Answer)**: [Main solution/conclusion]
📊 Structure Quality:
- Clarity: [★★★★☆]
- Logic flow: [★★★★★]
- Completeness: [★★★☆☆]
Phase 2C: 5W2H Completeness Check (if Level 1+)
Quick scan using references/5w2h_analysis.md:
## Information Completeness
✅ Well-covered: [What, Why, How]
⚠️ Partially covered: [Who, When]
❌ Missing: [Where, How much]
🔴 Critical gaps: [List 1-2 most important missing pieces]
Step 3: Apply Thinking Models
Select based on depth level and user preference:
Level 1 (Quick - 15 min)
Core: Structure + SCQA + 5W2H Quick Check
Output:
- SCQA breakdown
- Information gaps (from 5W2H)
- TOP 3 insights
- 1 immediate action item
Level 2 (Standard - 30 min)
Add: Critical Thinking + Inversion
Load and apply:
-
references/critical_thinking.md:- Argument quality assessment
- Logic flaw identification
- Evidence evaluation
- Alternative perspectives
-
references/inversion_thinking.md:- How to ensure failure? (reverse the advice)
- What assumptions if wrong?
- Missing risks
- Pre-mortem analysis
## Critical Analysis
### Argument Strength: [X/10]
Strengths:
- [Point 1]
Weaknesses:
- [Point 1]
Logical fallacies detected:
- [If any]
## Inversion Analysis
🚨 How this could fail:
1. [Failure mode 1] → Mitigation: [...]
2. [Failure mode 2] → Mitigation: [...]
Missing risk factors:
- [Risk 1]
Level 3 (Deep - 60 min)
Add: Mental Models + First Principles + Systems + Six Hats
Load and apply:
-
references/mental_models.md:- Select 3-5 relevant models from different disciplines
- Apply each lens to the content
- Identify cross-model insights
-
references/first_principles.md:- Strip to fundamental truths
- Identify core assumptions
- Rebuild understanding from base
-
references/systems_thinking.md:- Map relationships and feedback loops
- Identify leverage points
- See the big picture
-
references/six_hats.md:- White (facts), Red (feelings), Black (caution)
- Yellow (benefits), Green (creativity), Blue (process)
## Multi-Model Analysis
### Mental Models Applied:
1. **[Model 1 from X discipline]**
Insight: [...]
2. **[Model 2 from Y discipline]**
Insight: [...]
3. **[Model 3 from Z discipline]**
Insight: [...]
Cross-model pattern: [Key insight from combining models]
### First Principles Breakdown:
Core assumptions:
1. [Assumption 1] → Valid: [Yes/No/Conditional]
2. [Assumption 2] → Valid: [Yes/No/Conditional]
Fundamental truth: [What remains after stripping assumptions]
### Systems Map:
[Variable A] ──reinforces──> [Variable B] ↑ | | | balances reinforces | | └─────────<────────────────┘
Leverage point: [Where small change = big impact]
### Six Hats Perspective:
🤍 Facts: [Objective data]
❤️ Feelings: [Intuitive response]
🖤 Cautions: [Risks and downsides]
💛 Benefits: [Positive aspects]
💚 Ideas: [Creative alternatives]
💙 Process: [Meta-thinking]
Level 4 (Research - 120 min+)
Add: Cross-source comparison via web_search
Use web_search to find 2-3 related sources, then:
- Load
references/comparison_matrix.md - Compare SCQA across sources
- Identify consensus vs. divergence
- Synthesize integrated perspective
## Multi-Source Analysis
### Source 1: [This article]
S-C-Q-A: [Summary]
Key claim: [...]
### Source 2: [Found article]
S-C-Q-A: [Summary]
Key claim: [...]
### Source 3: [Found article]
S-C-Q-A: [Summary]
Key claim: [...]
## Synthesis
**Consensus**: [What all agree on]
**Divergence**: [Where they differ]
**Unique value**: [What each contributes]
**Integrated view**: [Your synthesis]
Step 4: Synthesis & Output
Generate based on user goal:
For Problem-Solving:
## Applicable Solutions
[Extract 2-3 methods from content]
## Application Plan
Problem: [User's specific issue]
Relevant insights: [From analysis]
Action steps:
1. [Concrete action with timeline]
2. [Concrete action with timeline]
3. [Concrete action with timeline]
Success metrics: [How to measure]
## Risk Mitigation (from Inversion)
Potential failure points:
- [Point 1] → Prevent by: [...]
- [Point 2] → Prevent by: [...]
For Learning:
## Learning Notes
Core concepts (explained simply):
1. **[Concept 1]**: [Definition + Example]
2. **[Concept 2]**: [Definition + Example]
Mental models gained:
- [Model 1]: [How it works]
Connections to prior knowledge:
- [Link to something user already knows]
## Deeper Understanding (First Principles)
Fundamental question: [...]
Core principle: [...]
## Verification Questions
1. [Question to test understanding]
2. [Question to test application]
3. [Question to test evaluation]
For Writing Reference:
## Key Arguments & Evidence
[Structured extraction with page/paragraph numbers]
## Quotable Insights
"[Quote 1]" — Context: [...]
"[Quote 2]" — Context: [...]
## Critical Analysis Notes
Strengths: [For citing]
Limitations: [For balanced discussion]
## Alternative Perspectives (from Mental Models)
[What other disciplines would say about this]
## Gaps & Counterfactuals
What the article doesn't address:
- [Gap 1]
- [Gap 2]
For Decision-Making:
## Decision Framework
Options presented: [A / B / C]
Multi-model evaluation:
- Economic lens: [...]
- Risk lens (Inversion): [...]
- Systems lens: [...]
## Six Hats Decision Analysis
🤍 Facts: [Objective comparison]
🖤 Risks: [What could go wrong]
💛 Benefits: [Upside potential]
💚 Alternatives: [Other options not considered]
💙 Recommendation: [Synthesized advice]
## Scenario Analysis (from Inversion)
Best case: [...]
Worst case: [...]
Most likely: [...]
Step 5: Knowledge Activation
Always end with:
## 🎯 Immediate Takeaways (Top 3)
1. **[Insight 1]**
Why it matters: [Personal relevance]
One action: [Specific, time-bound]
2. **[Insight 2]**
Why it matters: [Personal relevance]
One action: [Specific, time-bound]
3. **[Insight 3]**
Why it matters: [Personal relevance]
One action: [Specific, time-bound]
## 💡 Quick Win
[One thing to try in next 24 hours - make it TINY and SPECIFIC]
## 🔗 Next Steps
**To deepen understanding:**
[ ] Further reading: [If relevant]
[ ] Apply framework X to topic Y
[ ] Discuss with: [Who could add perspective]
**To apply:**
[ ] Experiment: [Test in real context]
[ ] Teach: [E
---
*Content truncated.*
When not to use it
- →Analyzing simple, non-argumentative text
- →Tasks requiring creative generation rather than analysis
Limitations
- →Results depend on the quality of provided source text
- →Over-application of frameworks may lead to cognitive fatigue
How it compares
It applies established academic and thinking models to content rather than summarizing it in a generic fashion.
Compared to similar skills
deep-reading-analyst side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| deep-reading-analyst (this skill) | 1 | 9mo | No flags | Beginner |
| ce-slack-research | 0 | 2mo | No flags | Beginner |
| literature-review | 559 | 2mo | Review | Advanced |
| youtube-wisdom | 10 | 1mo | Review | Intermediate |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
You might also like
ce-slack-research
Santiagoisper
Search Slack for interpreted organizational context -- decisions, constraints, and discussion arcs -- and produce a synthesized research digest with cross-cutting analysis. Use when the user says 'search slack for', 'what did we discuss about', 'slack context for', or 'what does the team think about
literature-review
K-Dense-AI
Conduct comprehensive, systematic literature reviews using multiple academic databases (PubMed, arXiv, bioRxiv, Semantic Scholar, etc.). This skill should be used when conducting systematic literature reviews, meta-analyses, research synthesis, or comprehensive literature searches across biomedical, scientific, and technical domains. Creates professionally formatted markdown documents and PDFs with verified citations in multiple citation styles (APA, Nature, Vancouver, etc.).
youtube-wisdom
sammcj
Extract wisdom, insights, and actionable takeaways from YouTube videos. Use when asked to analyse, summarise, or extract key learnings from YouTube content. Downloads transcripts only (no video files), performs comprehensive analysis including key insights, notable quotes, structured summaries, and actionable takeaways, then saves the analysis to a markdown file.
qmd
tobi
Search personal markdown knowledge bases, notes, meeting transcripts, and documentation using QMD - a local hybrid search engine. Combines BM25 keyword search, vector semantic search, and LLM re-ranking. Use when users ask to search notes, find documents, look up information in their knowledge base, retrieve meeting notes, or search documentation. Triggers on "search markdown files", "search my notes", "find in docs", "look up", "what did I write about", "meeting notes about".
read-arxiv-paper
karpathy
Use this skill when when asked to read an arxiv paper given an arxiv URL
knowledge-synthesis
anthropics
Combines search results from multiple sources into coherent, deduplicated answers with source attribution. Handles confidence scoring based on freshness and authority, and summarizes large result sets effectively.