What problem does it solve? Researchers who have finished a study often cannot tell whether their contribution is real, well-constructed, and honestly presented. This Skill provides a four-step diagnostic framework distilled from 8 authoritative methodology sources to evaluate contribution type, construction quality, Discussion/Conclusion effectiveness, and limitation sincerity. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Contribution Type Positioning: Classifies your contribution as theory advancement, phenomenon discovery, review integration, policy dialogue, or method innovation, and checks fit with target journal expectations. - Six-Path Construction Diagnosis: Audits contribution building across six failure modes from Ravasi et al. (2025): context over-reliance, missing Why explanations, absent tensions, unlabeled model arrows, rhetorical inflation, and outdated frameworks. - Discussion & Limitation Audits: Detects the three classic traps (rehashing, meandering, overreaching) and applies a four-element test (Describe, Implication, Alternative, Mitigation) to every limitation statement. - Use Case: A reviewer says your Discussion is weak. Run the Step C diagnostic to check whether you are restating results, scattering implications across too many directions, or claiming conclusions your data cannot support, then apply the targeted fixes. ## Quick Start Ask the assistant to diagnose whether your finished paper's contribution is sufficient and whether the Discussion and limitations sections pass the four-step contribution check.
