Use for the search-planning stage of a literature review, when database lanes and language layers must be chosen, when DOI coverage policy is unclear, or when inclusion and exclusion criteria need drafting before any source is read; not for running the screening and PRISMA pipeline of a formal review, which is prisma-scoping-review-pipeline.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Use this skill before a literature review, scoping review, thesis chapter, grant background, or manuscript introduction when the user needs a search plan that can survive method review rather than an immediate prose draft. Its protocol feeds regional-access-workflow for retrieval and source-passport-ledger for tracking what the search returns. It is not for running a full PRISMA-compliant systematic review pipeline, that is prisma-scoping-review-pipeline.
Return a compact protocol with these headings:
Do not request passwords, private vault paths, university database credentials, VPN secrets, or raw clinical data. If full-text access requires a logged-in institution, stop at the lawful access workflow and ask the user to retrieve the file through their own authorized route.
"Scope a Turkish and English literature review on AI-assisted clinical psychology supervision, 2020 to 2026, with DOI discipline and regional database coverage."
Expected smoke output:
Bu beceri, literatür taramasına başlamadan önce yöntem incelemesine dayanacak bir arama planı kurar. Veritabanı kanalları, dil katmanları, DOI beklentileri ve dahil etme ölçütleri tek protokolde toplanır, bölgesel kaynaklar gözden kaçırılmaz. Arama dizgileri başka bir araştırmacının aynı sonuçlara ulaşabileceği kadar açık yazılır, yanlılık riskleri daha ilk adımda not edilir. Plan hazır olduğunda erişim için regional-access-workflow, bulunanların izlenmesi için source-passport-ledger devreye girer. Tam sistematik derleme gerekiyorsa prisma-scoping-review-pipeline'a devredilir. Oturum sonunda arama protokolü ve yapay zekâ katkı notu kaydedilir. Paylaşılan kimlik bilgileri veya kurumsal politika dışı yollarla erişim bu becerinin kapsamı dışındadır — yasal erişim yolları için regional-access-workflow devreye girer.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Use when a complete research workflow — its instructions, skills, data boundaries, and tool connections — must be assessed for portability across AI agents or environments, so each component is explicitly mapped before migration rather than assumed to transfer.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when a Claude Code session loops, drifts from scope, claims a fix that CI rejects, hits context, PATH, or permission walls, or fails in a way another retry will not solve and a root cause diagnosis is needed instead.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when AI contribution metadata must match the actual workflow, when model alias and dated identifiers need auditing, when verified and fabricated citation counts feed a release decision, or when a venue's AI disclosure statement needs evidence behind it.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when a draft in Turkish, English, or both reads as AI-generated and needs revision that removes machine writing patterns and translation calques while preserving meaning, citations, statistics, and the author's voice.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when a reference list needs APA 7 cleanup, when DOIs must be confirmed real against Crossref or PubMed, when the user asks whether AI-suggested citations actually exist, or when a manuscript needs a citation hygiene pass before submission or defense.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when authorship order, CRediT contribution roles, or AI-assistance attribution must be recorded transparently for a manuscript, when an author dispute needs an evidence trail, or before a contributorship statement is required at submission; this skill maintains the human-attribution ledger of who contributed what and in which role (authorship order, CRediT taxonomy, revision responsibilities), which is distinct from the disclosure-metadata audit owned by ai-disclosure-auditor.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。