본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

lit-review

Survey academic research on a topic by searching journals, working papers, and citation links. Combine findings into a structured report covering key papers, competing results, research gaps, and verified bibliography entries.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

원문원문 설명 보기

Structured literature review using a parallel fleet of Librarian agents. Searches top journals, working paper repositories (NBER, SSRN, IZA), and traces citation chains from key papers. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants to survey existing research on a topic — not to find datasets or write a paper. Triggers include: "review the literature", "find related papers", "what's been done on X", "search for papers on", "do a lit review", "find papers about", "what papers should I cite", "who has written about this", "survey the literature", "find prior work on", or any request to locate and summarize academic publications on a topic.

실행 점수 미검증

설치 방법 보기

이럴 때 유용합니다

  • Survey prior research on a new topic
  • Find related studies through a key paper's citations
  • Compare conflicting findings across studies
  • Organize research gaps and citation candidates

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md8.3 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Literature Review

Conduct a systematic literature review using a parallel fleet of Librarian agents, each searching a different angle. Citation chains from anchor papers are the highest-yield search vector and always run when anchor papers are available.

Input: $ARGUMENTS — a topic, research question, or the title of a known key paper.


Step 1: Orient and Gather Context

  1. Read quality_reports/project_spec_*.md or quality_reports/research_*.md if they exist — extract the research question and identification strategy.
  2. Check references/papers/ — list any PDFs already on hand.
  3. Read the project .bib file (Bibliography_base.bib or any .bib at project root) — extract paper titles and authors already known.
  4. Read references/domain-profile.md if it exists — get the field's journal list and key researchers.
  5. Identify anchor papers: the 1–3 most central known papers (from existing bib or supporting docs). These seed the citation chain search.

If references/domain-profile.md does not exist, use AskUserQuestion to determine the field:

  • header: "Field"
  • question: "What field is this research in? This determines which journals and repositories the librarian agents search."
  • options:
    • label: "Economics", description: "AER, QJE, Econometrica, JPE, ReStud + NBER/IZA"
    • label: "Political Science", description: "APSR, AJPS, JOP, CPS, World Politics"
    • label: "Sociology", description: "ASR, AJS, Social Forces, Demography"
    • label: "Public Health", description: "NEJM, Lancet, JAMA, AJE"

Step 2: Assign Librarians

Dispatch 3–5 Librarian agents in parallel using Task. Each gets a specific search angle, the topic, and the anchor papers (if any).

Always dispatch (3 minimum):

Librarian 1 — Top Journals:

Task prompt: "You are a Librarian agent. Topic: [topic]. Search angle: Top Journals.
Field: [field from domain-profile or user answer].
Top journals to search: [list from domain-profile, or infer for field].
Anchor papers (for context only): [list].
Find the 8-12 most relevant published papers from the past 10 years.
For seminal papers, go back further. Follow the Librarian agent instructions."

Librarian 2 — Working Papers (NBER + SSRN + IZA):

Task prompt: "You are a Librarian agent. Topic: [topic]. Search angle: NBER + SSRN + IZA.
Search NBER (site:nber.org), SSRN (site:ssrn.com), and IZA (site:iza.org/publications/dp)
for recent working papers on this topic. Find 6-10 working papers.
Flag all as working papers. Follow the Librarian agent instructions."

Librarian 3 — Secondary Journals + Adjacent Fields:

Task prompt: "You are a Librarian agent. Topic: [topic]. Search angle: Secondary Journals.
Field: [field]. Secondary journals: [list from domain-profile, or search broadly].
Also search adjacent fields that might have relevant methodology or findings.
Find 5-8 papers. Follow the Librarian agent instructions."

Add when anchor papers are available (dispatch 4th and 5th):

Librarian 4 — Backward Citation Chain:

Task prompt: "You are a Librarian agent. Topic: [topic]. Search angle: Citation Chain — BACKWARD.
Anchor papers: [title, authors, year for each].
For each anchor paper: use Semantic Scholar API to find what it cites.
Extract 8-12 most relevant references from the combined reference lists.
These are the papers the anchor papers build on — the theoretical and empirical foundations.
Follow the Librarian agent instructions for citation chain search."

Librarian 5 — Forward Citation Chain:

Task prompt: "You are a Librarian agent. Topic: [topic]. Search angle: Citation Chain — FORWARD.
Anchor papers: [title, authors, year for each].
For each anchor paper: use Semantic Scholar API to find who cites it.
Focus on papers published in the last 3 years — these represent the active research frontier.
Find 8-12 most relevant papers that cite the anchor papers.
Follow the Librarian agent instructions for citation chain search."

Why citation chains beat keyword search: The papers that cite your anchor papers are by definition working on the same problem. The papers your anchor papers cite are the foundations your paper must engage with. These vectors find papers that keyword searches miss entirely.


Step 3: Consolidate and Deduplicate

After all Librarians complete:

  1. Merge all paper lists from all Librarians.
  2. Deduplicate: if the same paper appears from multiple sources, keep one entry and note "Found via: [multiple sources]" — cross-source confirmation increases confidence.
  3. Flag any papers marked FLAG by a Librarian — do not include in final BibTeX without manual verification.
  4. Total target: 20–40 papers (quality over quantity).

Step 4: Organize Thematically

Sort papers into these categories:

  • Theoretical Contributions — models, mechanisms, frameworks
  • Empirical Findings — key results, effect sizes, data used
  • Methodological Innovations — estimators, identification strategies, inference
  • Open Debates — unresolved disagreements, conflicting findings

For each category, write a 2–3 paragraph synthesis (not just a list).


Step 5: Identify Gaps

List 3–5 specific gaps the reviewed literature leaves open:

  • Questions not asked
  • Populations or contexts not studied
  • Data limitations that constrained prior work
  • Methodological assumptions no one has relaxed
  • Conflicting findings that need resolution

For each gap: "No paper has examined X in context Y using method Z. This matters because..."


Step 6: Save Report

Save to quality_reports/lit_review_[sanitized_topic].md:

# Literature Review: [Topic]

**Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Search strategy:** [N Librarians — journals, NBER/SSRN/IZA, citation chains from: [anchor papers]]
**Papers reviewed:** N total (M published, K working papers)

## Summary

[3-paragraph overview of the state of the literature]

## Key Papers

### [Author(s) (Year)] — [Short Title]
- **Venue:** [Journal / NBER wXXXX / IZA DP XXXX]
- **Method:** [Identification strategy + data]
- **Key finding:** [Result with effect size]
- **Relevance:** [Why it matters for our question]
- **Found via:** [Librarian source]

[Repeat for all papers, ordered by relevance]

---

## Thematic Organization

### Theoretical Contributions
[Synthesis paragraph(s)]

### Empirical Findings
[Synthesis comparing results across studies]

### Methodological Innovations
[Methods relevant to our research question]

### Open Debates
[Conflicting findings and unresolved questions]

---

## Gaps and Opportunities

1. [Gap 1 — specific and actionable]
2. [Gap 2]
3. [Gap 3]

---

## Suggested Next Steps

- Papers to read in full: [list 3-5 highest priority]
- `/data-finder [topic]` — identify datasets for the priority research question
- `/validate-bib` after incorporating new citations into the manuscript

---

## BibTeX Entries

```bibtex
[all verified entries]

Flagged Papers (Unverified — Manual Check Required)

[Papers Librarians marked FLAG — verify before citing]


---

## Important

- **Working papers change.** Note the date retrieved for all working papers.
- **Do not include flagged papers in the BibTeX block.** Move them to the Flagged section.
- **Citation chains are the most productive vector.** Librarians 4 and 5 often find the most important missing papers — always dispatch them when anchor papers are available.
- **Recommend `/validate-bib`** after the user incorporates new citations into the manuscript.

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-Skills4.8천2026년 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-Skills4.8천2026년 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-Skills4.8천2026년 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-Skills4.8천2026년 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-Skills4.8천2026년 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-Skills4.8천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

brycewang-stanford의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고