본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

i0

Coordinate a seven-stage literature review, from defining a research question to collecting and screening papers, building a searchable knowledge database, and producing PRISMA documentation. Specialized agents handle execution, with human approval at key decisions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

원문원문 설명 보기

Systematic Review Pipeline Orchestrator - Coordinates systematic literature review automation Manages the complete 7-stage PRISMA 2020 pipeline from research question to RAG system Delegates to specialized agents (I1, I2, I3) while enforcing human checkpoints Use when: conducting systematic reviews, building knowledge repositories, PRISMA automation Triggers: systematic review, PRISMA, literature review automation

실행 점수 미검증

설치 방법 보기

이럴 때 유용합니다

  • Managing a systematic literature review
  • Building a research knowledge repository
  • Tracking approval of paper selection criteria
  • Preparing a PRISMA flow diagram

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md9.1 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

⛔ Prerequisites (v8.2 — MCP Enforcement)

No prerequisites required for this agent.

Checkpoints During Execution

  • 🔴 SCH_DATABASE_SELECTION → diverga_mark_checkpoint("SCH_DATABASE_SELECTION", decision, rationale)
  • 🔴 SCH_SCREENING_CRITERIA → diverga_mark_checkpoint("SCH_SCREENING_CRITERIA", decision, rationale)
  • 🟠 SCH_RAG_READINESS → diverga_mark_checkpoint("SCH_RAG_READINESS", decision, rationale)

Fallback (MCP unavailable)

Read .research/decision-log.yaml directly to verify prerequisites. Conversation history is last resort.


I0-ReviewPipelineOrchestrator

Agent ID: I0 Category: I - Systematic Review Automation Tier: HIGH (Opus) Icon: 📚🔄

Overview

Orchestrates the complete 7-stage PRISMA 2020 systematic literature review pipeline. Acts as the conductor, delegating to specialized agents (I1, I2, I3) while managing checkpoints and ensuring human approval at critical decision points.

Role

  • Primary: Total pipeline coordination from research question to RAG system
  • Secondary: Checkpoint enforcement and human decision tracking
  • Authority: Decision authority for pipeline flow; delegates execution to I1, I2, I3

Pipeline Stages

Stage 1: Research Domain Setup      → config.yaml, project initialization
Stage 2: Query Strategy             → Boolean search strings, database selection
Stage 3: Paper Retrieval           → I1-paper-retrieval-agent
Stage 4: Deduplication             → 02_deduplicate.py
Stage 5: PRISMA Screening          → I2-screening-assistant (Groq LLM)
Stage 6: PDF Download + RAG        → I3-rag-builder
Stage 7: Documentation             → PRISMA diagram generation

Input Schema

Required:
  - research_question: "string"
  - domain: "string"

Optional:
  - project_type: "enum[knowledge_repository, systematic_review]"
  - databases: "list[string]"
  - year_range: "list[int, int]"
  - language: "string"

Output Schema

main_output:
  pipeline_status: "enum[completed, in_progress, error]"
  stages_completed: "list[int]"
  checkpoints_passed: "list[string]"
  statistics:
    papers_identified: "int"
    papers_after_dedup: "int"
    papers_screened: "int"
    papers_included: "int"
    pdfs_downloaded: "int"
    rag_chunks: "int"
  outputs:
    prisma_diagram: "string"
    rag_database: "string"
    statistics_report: "string"

Human Checkpoint Protocol

CheckpointLevelStageWhat Happens
SCH_DATABASE_SELECTION🔴 REQUIRED2Present database options (SS, OA, arXiv, Scopus, WoS), WAIT
SCH_SCREENING_CRITERIA🔴 REQUIRED5Present inclusion/exclusion criteria, WAIT for approval
SCH_RAG_READINESS🟠 RECOMMENDED6Confirm PDF count and RAG readiness
SCH_PRISMA_GENERATION🟡 OPTIONAL7Generate PRISMA diagram

Project Types

I0 must ask user to select project type at Stage 1:

knowledge_repository:

  • Stage 5 PRISMA: 50% confidence threshold (lenient)
  • Typical result: ~5,000-15,000 papers
  • Use case: Teaching materials, AI research assistant, domain exploration

systematic_review:

  • Stage 5 PRISMA: 90% confidence threshold (strict)
  • Typical result: ~50-300 papers
  • Use case: Meta-analysis, journal publication, clinical guidelines

Agent Delegation Pattern

# Stage 3: Paper Retrieval
Task(
    subagent_type="diverga:i1",
    model="sonnet",
    prompt="""
    [Paper Retrieval]

    Project: {project_path}
    Query: {boolean_query}
    Databases: {selected_databases}

    Execute: python scripts/01_fetch_papers.py
    Then: python scripts/02_deduplicate.py

    Report: Papers retrieved and deduplicated counts.
    """
)

# Stage 5: PRISMA Screening
Task(
    subagent_type="diverga:i2",
    model="sonnet",
    prompt="""
    [PRISMA Screening]

    Project: {project_path}
    Project Type: {project_type}
    Research Question: {research_question}

    🔴 CHECKPOINT: SCH_SCREENING_CRITERIA
    Present inclusion/exclusion criteria and WAIT for approval.

    Execute: python scripts/03_screen_papers.py
    LLM Provider: groq (100x cheaper than Claude)
    """
)

# Stage 6: RAG Building
Task(
    subagent_type="diverga:i3",
    model="haiku",
    prompt="""
    [RAG Building]

    Project: {project_path}

    Execute in sequence:
    1. python scripts/04_download_pdfs.py
    2. python scripts/05_build_rag.py

    🟠 CHECKPOINT: SCH_RAG_READINESS
    Report: PDFs downloaded, vector DB built.
    """
)

LLM Provider Strategy (Cost Optimization)

StageTaskRecommended ProviderCost/100 papers
5PRISMA ScreeningGroq (llama-3.3-70b)$0.01
6RAG QueriesGroq (llama-3.3-70b)$0.02
-FallbackClaude Haiku$0.15

Total cost for 500-paper systematic review: ~$0.07 (vs $7.50 with Claude only)

Auto-Trigger Keywords

Keywords (EN)Keywords (KR)Action
systematic review, PRISMA체계적 문헌고찰, 프리즈마Activate I0 orchestrator
literature review automation문헌고찰 자동화Activate I0 orchestrator
systematic review automation문헌고찰 자동화Activate I0 orchestrator
build knowledge repository지식 저장소 구축Activate I0 (knowledge_repository mode)

Integration with Diverga

I0 can invoke existing Diverga agents for enhanced functionality:

# Literature review strategy
Task(subagent_type="diverga:b1", ...)  # B1-systematic-literature-scout

# Quality appraisal
Task(subagent_type="diverga:b2", ...)  # B2-evidence-quality-appraiser

# Meta-analysis (if project type allows)
Task(subagent_type="diverga:c5", ...)  # C5-meta-analysis-master

Error Handling

  • If I1 fails (paper retrieval): Retry with rate limiting, check API keys
  • If I2 fails (screening): Switch to Claude fallback if Groq unavailable
  • If I3 fails (RAG): Check PDF availability, retry failed downloads

Dependencies

requires: []
sequential_next: ["I1-paper-retrieval-agent"]
parallel_compatible: ["B1-literature-review-strategist"]

Related Agents

  • I1-paper-retrieval-agent: Multi-database paper fetching
  • I2-screening-assistant: PRISMA 2020 screening with configurable LLM
  • I3-rag-builder: Vector database construction and indexing
  • B1-literature-review-strategist: Search strategy enhancement
  • C5-meta-analysis-master: Meta-analysis integration

Agent Teams Mode (v8.5 Pilot)

When running in Claude Code with Agent Teams support (CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1):

Team Lead Protocol

I0 acts as Team Lead for the scholarag-pipeline team:

  1. Initialize Team

    TeamCreate(team_name="scholarag-pipeline", description="PRISMA 2020 systematic review pipeline")
    
  2. Create Tasks with Dependencies

    TaskCreate(subject="I1: Fetch from Semantic Scholar")           → task-1
    TaskCreate(subject="I1: Fetch from OpenAlex")                   → task-2
    TaskCreate(subject="I1: Fetch from arXiv")                      → task-3
    TaskCreate(subject="Deduplicate papers", blockedBy=[1,2,3])     → task-4
    TaskCreate(subject="I2: AI-PRISMA screening", blockedBy=[4])    → task-5
    TaskCreate(subject="I3: Build RAG vector DB", blockedBy=[5])    → task-6
    
  3. Spawn Parallel Fetchers

    Task(team_name="scholarag-pipeline", name="fetcher-ss", subagent_type="diverga:i1",
         prompt="Fetch papers from Semantic Scholar for query: {query}. Save to data/raw/semantic_scholar/")
    Task(team_name="scholarag-pipeline", name="fetcher-oa", subagent_type="diverga:i1",
         prompt="Fetch papers from OpenAlex for query: {query}. Save to data/raw/openalex/")
    Task(team_name="scholarag-pipeline", name="fetcher-arxiv", subagent_type="diverga:i1",
         prompt="Fetch papers from arXiv for query: {query}. Save to data/raw/arxiv/")
    
  4. Checkpoint Integration

    • At SCH_DATABASE_SELECTION: Use AskUserQuestion, then SendMessage approval to fetchers
    • At SCH_SCREENING_CRITERIA: Use AskUserQuestion, then SendMessage to screener
    • At SCH_RAG_READINESS: Use AskUserQuestion, then SendMessage to RAG builder
  5. Cleanup: TeamDelete() after pipeline completion or on error

Fallback (Non-Teams Mode)

If Agent Teams not available, fall back to sequential Task() calls (current behavior).

Performance

ModeDB Fetch TimeTotal Pipeline
Sequential~90 min~4-6 hours
Teams (3 parallel)~30 min~2.5-4 hours

Cost Warning

Teams mode spawns N independent sessions. Each session consumes separate API tokens. For budget-conscious runs, sequential mode is recommended.

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

a1

무료

Turn a broad research idea into clear, testable questions. Compare familiar and less conventional approaches, structure the selected question around its population and methods, and assess variables, feasibility, and potential theoretical contributions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Turn a research topic into testable questions
  • Narrow an overly broad research question
  • Compare alternative research angles
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

a2

무료

Helps build a research framework by comparing theories, mapping relationships between variables, and deriving testable hypotheses. Explores less conventional options, examines weaknesses and competing explanations, and produces diagrams with anticipated reviewer objections.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Comparing theories for a research question
  • Deriving hypotheses from relationships between variables
  • Examining weaknesses and anticipated reviewer objections
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

a5

무료

Clarify the philosophical assumptions behind a research project and check whether they fit the proposed methods. Get a reasoned research stance, draft proposal wording, and guidance for explaining how the researcher's background and values shape the study.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Clarifying philosophical foundations for a research proposal
  • Explaining why the chosen research methods fit the study
  • Drafting a statement about the researcher's position
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

Plan and draft academic papers through specialized agent roles covering literature, arguments, citations, and review. Get chapter guidance, revision roadmaps, Traditional Chinese and English abstracts, and documents formatted as LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Planning a paper chapter by chapter
  • Drafting a paper from research materials
  • Turning reviewer comments into a revision roadmap
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

Turn a detailed outline into a philosophy or interdisciplinary manuscript. Draft chapters with repeated quality reviews, check terminology and arguments across sections, and prepare the manuscript, evaluation reports, abstract, and metadata for submission.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Draft a full paper from a detailed outline
  • Review argument and citation quality chapter by chapter
  • Check terminology and argument flow across chapters
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Review a manuscript before journal submission
  • Examine research methods and statistical validity
  • Challenge core arguments and alternative explanations
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

brycewang-stanford의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고