Use this skill whenever a user needs help writing, drafting, revising, or structuring a dissertation prospectus, dissertation proposal, qualifying exam proposal, upgrade document, transfer document, or fieldwork clearance proposal for anthropological research. Triggers include: any mention of "prospectus," "dissertation proposal," "qualifying exam," "QE," "upgrade proposal," "transfer of status," "confirmation of status," "fieldwork proposal," or "fieldwork clearance" in the context of anthropology or ethnographic research; requests to structure, draft, or revise any section of a dissertation proposal (problem statement, research questions, theoretical positioning, literature review, methods, ethics, timeline, budget); questions about what a committee expects or how to prepare for a prospectus defense or upgrade viva. Also use when the user says "I need to write my prospectus," "I'm preparing for my qualifying exam," "how do I structure a dissertation proposal," or "what should my prospectus include." Covers US prospectuses (Berkeley, Harvard, and other programs), UK upgrade/transfer/fieldwork proposals (LSE, Cambridge, Oxford), and dual-purpose prospectuses that also serve as grant applications. Do NOT use for standalone grant proposals without a committee audience (use grant-proposal skill), general academic paper writing (use academic-paper skill), or research question development without a prospectus context (use research-question skill).
From ai-anthropologynpx claudepluginhub mattartzanthro/ai-anthropology-toolkit --plugin ai-anthropologyThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
references/prospectus-guide.mdGuides Next.js Cache Components and Partial Prerendering (PPR) with cacheComponents enabled. Implements 'use cache', cacheLife(), cacheTag(), revalidateTag(), static/dynamic optimization, and cache debugging.
Migrates code, prompts, and API calls from Claude Sonnet 4.0/4.5 or Opus 4.1 to Opus 4.5, updating model strings on Anthropic, AWS, GCP, Azure platforms.
Analyzes BMad project state from catalog CSV, configs, artifacts, and query to recommend next skills or answer questions. Useful for help requests, 'what next', or starting BMad.
Write dissertation prospectuses and proposals for anthropological research that satisfy both committee expectations (intellectual coherence, feasibility, scholarly preparation) and — when dual-purpose — funder requirements (compliance, risk mitigation, credible execution). The strongest prospectuses are modular: adaptable into a committee document, a fundable grant narrative, and an ethics dossier without full rewrites.
| Task | Reference |
|---|---|
| Full prospectus guidance (sections, length norms, evaluation criteria, examples) | Read references/prospectus-guide.md |
| NSF DDRIG-specific requirements (if dual-purpose) | Load from grant-proposal skill: references/nsf-cultural-anthro.md |
| Wenner-Gren-specific requirements (if dual-purpose) | Load from grant-proposal skill: references/wenner-gren.md |
| Fulbright-specific requirements (if dual-purpose) | Load from grant-proposal skill: references/fulbright.md |
Determine the entry point:
Before generating any content, ask for these required inputs:
Helpful but not required: theoretical framework, preliminary fieldwork or pilot data, language competencies, committee composition, timeline constraints.
Always load references/prospectus-guide.md for the full section-by-section
guidance, length norms, evaluation criteria, and examples.
If the user is writing a dual-purpose document, also load the relevant funder reference from the grant-proposal skill to ensure the prospectus satisfies both audiences simultaneously.
Follow the section structure and proportional allocations in the reference file. Key principles:
Before presenting output, verify:
| Failure mode | Prevention |
|---|---|
| Overbreadth — too many questions, none convincing | Limit to 2-4 tightly articulated questions |
| Ethics as afterthought — perfunctory section | Make ethics a workflow step throughout |
| Vague analysis plan — "I will use thematic analysis" | Specify coding approach, triangulation, what constitutes a claim |
| Methods as menu — lists techniques without logic | Frame as inferential design generating specific evidence |
| No contingency — assumes everything goes to plan | Include Plan B with alternative methods and claim limitations |
| Answers already known — telegraphs conclusions | Frame genuinely open questions; acknowledge uncertainty |
| Generic literature review — lists without argument | Make the review an argument about where this project intervenes |
| Mission mismatch — description without theory contribution | Connect every methods choice to a theoretical claim |
Example 1: US sociocultural prospectus (Berkeley-style)
Input: "I'm writing my prospectus for my QE at Berkeley. My project is about how Senegalese migrants in Paris use WhatsApp groups to maintain translocal kinship networks. I work within an interpretivist framework drawing on practice theory and digital anthropology."
Output approach:
references/prospectus-guide.mdExample 2: UK fieldwork proposal (Cambridge-style)
Input: "I need to write my fieldwork proposal for Cambridge clearance. My research examines Indigenous water governance in Bolivia's Altiplano. I work within decolonial and political ecology traditions."
Output approach:
references/prospectus-guide.mdExample 3: Dual-purpose prospectus + NSF DDRIG
Input: "I'm writing my dissertation prospectus and I also want to adapt it for my NSF DDRIG application. My project studies algorithmic hiring systems in tech companies from an STS perspective."
Output approach:
references/prospectus-guide.md AND nsf-cultural-anthro.md