A Hermes Agent skill for disciplined information analysis.
It helps turn scattered material into a useful answer: a clear question, source map, competing hypotheses, uncertainty, conclusion, and next action.
The skill is based on the method work from the Russian textbook project “Аналитика как метод обработки информации”. The book text is not included in this repository.
Use it when a task is not just “summarize this”, but requires judgment:
- define the real analytical question behind a vague topic;
- separate facts, interpretations, assumptions, hypotheses, and conclusions;
- evaluate sources by proximity, freshness, independence, incentives, and limits;
- compare competing explanations instead of defending the first plausible one;
- state confidence and name what would change the answer;
- produce an analytical note, decision memo, briefing, review, or update.
- Not a collection of prompts for sounding clever.
- Not a replacement for domain expertise in law, medicine, finance, engineering, or statistics.
- Not a source pack or dataset.
- Not the textbook itself.
SKILL.md Main Hermes skill
references/method-core.md Analytical objects, valid transitions, operations
references/evidence-and-confidence.md Diagnosticity, evidence matrices, confidence rules
references/decision-and-revision.md Coupling conclusions to action and revision
references/method-map.md Method selector: which analytical move to use when
references/quality-gate.md Checklist and scoring gate for analytical outputs
templates/analysis-brief.md Reusable brief templates
Clone the repository and place it under your Hermes skills directory:
git clone https://github.com/x0rium/information-analysis-skill.git
mkdir -p ~/.hermes/skills/research
ln -s "$PWD/information-analysis-skill" ~/.hermes/skills/research/information-analysisOr copy it instead of symlinking:
cp -R information-analysis-skill ~/.hermes/skills/research/information-analysisThen start a fresh Hermes session and load the skill as information-analysis.
The skill is built around lawful transitions between claim types:
source → claim → evidence → inference → hypothesis → conclusion → recommendation → revision
Central distinctions:
information ≠ evidence
evidence ≠ fact
fact ≠ explanation
explanation ≠ conclusion
conclusion ≠ action
The method references explain how to keep those transitions inspectable, how to judge whether evidence actually distinguishes hypotheses, and how to keep recommendations proportional to confidence and reversibility.
1. Name the question.
2. Set the context and boundaries.
3. Map source quality and limits.
4. Split facts from interpretations and assumptions.
5. Generate competing hypotheses.
6. Compare evidence across hypotheses.
7. Name uncertainty and load-bearing assumptions.
8. State the conclusion, confidence, next check, and revision condition.
The point is not to run every step every time. Pick the smallest method that fixes the weak point of the analysis.
MIT.