research-integrity-gatelisted

# The integrity gate Say in one short line that you are using the `research-integrity-gate` skill before you act, so the user can see which discipline you are working under. Three deterministic checks stand between the graph and a shareable conclusion. They exit non-zero on failure and are wired into a `Stop` hook, so a session cannot quietly end on a broken graph. ```bash science integrity # audits claims, evidence, figures, run manifests science verify-store # verifies the hash-chained event log science verify-replay <package.zip> ``` Two gates run the same check: - `.claude/hooks/research_integrity.py` on `Stop`, so a Claude Code session cannot end on a broken graph. If it blocks, its stderr contains the findings table. - `.git/hooks/pre-commit`, so no client can commit on a broken graph. Installed by `sh scripts/install-git-hooks.sh`. Both check every `*.db` in the project and skip `*.corpus.db`. The `research_integrity` and `research_verify_store` MCP tools run the same audits and return structured findings. ## The one rule **Repair the graph, never the check.** Do not edit `src/scientistos/modules/integrity.py`, loosen a threshold, delete the failing node, or disable the hook to get a green result. The gate exists precisely because an agent under pressure to finish will otherwise argue its way past its own evidence. If you genuinely believe a check is wrong, say so and stop, and let the user decide. ## Findings and their real repairs Severities