BytesAgain is a curated directory of 60,000+ AI agent skills from ClawHub, GitHub, LobeHub, and Dify. Search skills by keyword in 7 languages, browse by role (developer, creator, trader, marketer) or by use case.

How do I find AI skills on BytesAgain?

Use the search bar on BytesAgain.com to search by keyword in 7 languages. You can also browse by role (developer, creator, trader, marketer) or by use case. Each skill shows install instructions for Claude, Cursor, OpenClaw, Continue, and more.

Yes, BytesAgain is completely free. No registration required for searching skills. The MCP API is also free with rate limits.

Does BytesAgain have an API for AI agents?

Yes! BytesAgain provides a free MCP SSE endpoint at /api/mcp/sse for AI agents, plus a REST API at /api/mcp?action=search&q= . No authentication needed.

Can I request a new AI skill on BytesAgain?

Yes! Visit the Requests page on BytesAgain.com to submit a skill request. Your request will be visible to the community and notified to the site admin.

🦀 ClawHub

Source Evaluator

by @quochungto

Evaluate, triage, and actively read a set of research sources — books, articles, and online materials — by applying a dual-axis relevance-and-reliability scr...

Versionv1.0.0

#crypto #can-make-purchases #clawhub

⚡ When to Use

Trigger	Action
- You have search results or a bibliography and need to triage it to a manageable set
- You are unsure whether a source is credible enough to cite in a scholarly or professional context
- You are reading to find or sharpen a research problem, not just collect supporting evidence
- You need to understand where sources agree and disagree to position your own argument
- You have taken notes but worry they may misrepresent what a source actually claims
The core pattern: evaluate every source on two axes — relevance to your question, and reliability of its claims — before committing reading time. Then read high-priority sources in two passes: first generously (to understand), then critically (to respond). Record what the source says and what you think about it in clearly separated layers.
Before starting, confirm you have:
- A stated research question or working hypothesis (even a rough one)
- At least one candidate source to evaluate
---

💡 Examples

Example 1: Triaging a bibliography

Research question: "How did social media use during the 2020 US election affect political polarization?"

Given 12 sources, the evaluator would:

Classify Wikipedia and a Pew Research explainer as tertiary (useful for orientation, not citation)

Mark a 2019 peer-reviewed article on social media and polarization as secondary + Read

Flag a 2016 book on political communication as secondary + Reliable but flag for currency (pre-2020)

Mark a personal blog post with no author or date as Exclude

Example 2: Reading for a research problem

A student reading a secondary source on urban desegregation finds the source argues that federal mandates uniformly increased white flight. The student applies creative disagreement type 3 (developmental contradiction): data from three Midwestern cities suggest the pattern peaked and then reversed after 5 years. That disagreement is the research problem.

Example 3: Context-preserving note

Poor note: "Jones (p. 123): The war was caused by Z." Better note: "Jones argues the war was caused by X, Y, and Z (p. 123); he considers Z the most important cause (p. 123), for reasons on pp. 124-28. Note: X and Y are introduced as background context, not as Jones's main causal argument."

View on ClawHub

TERMINAL

clawhub install bookforge-source-evaluator