coarse-review
coarse-review is a Peer review & grants skill for AI agents, published by Davidvandijcke in the coarse repository on GitHub. Skillspace rates coarse-review F (15/100) and the safety scan rated it unsafe; the rating is based on static analysis only.
Unsafe. This skill has patterns associated with malicious or dangerous behaviour. We do not recommend running it.
Produce a rigorous academic peer review of a research paper, manuscript, or preprint (PDF, markdown, TeX, DOCX, HTML, or EPUB) using the full coarse pipeline with the user's local Claude Code subscription doing all the LLM reasoning. Every pipeline stage — structure analysis, overview synthesis, per-section review, proof verification, editorial pass — is served by a headless `claude -p` subprocess instead of a paid API. Use when the user asks to review, critique, referee, or provide feedback on an academic paper. Takes 10-25 minutes. Do NOT use for code review, blog posts, or non-academic documents.
- Grade
- F
- Quality
- 15 / 100
- Safety
- Unsafe
- GitHub stars
- 175
Unproven: rated by static analysis only, not yet compared head-to-head.
Our two independent classifiers differ on this skill's category, so treat the placement as provisional.
This rating describes the version of the repository we crawled; it may have changed since.
Our review
- Architecture
- 84 / 100
- Maturity
- Basic: a single SKILL.md
- Security scan
- Critical-risk patterns
- License
- MIT
- Adoption
- Adopted by 0 other repositories, in 0 collections
What the scanner flagged
- pipe remote script to shell
- mentions secrets in text
Not checked yet
- Not judged on the rubric yet (not a contender in its category)
- No blind task eval yet
- Scope (portable / vendor / repo-internal) not assessed; only the top of each category is read for scope
- Sibling files (scripts, references) not fetched; security scan covers SKILL.md only
Skillspace indexes and rates this skill; it does not host or endorse it. Run third-party skills at your own risk.