跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

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

实测评分 未实测

查看安装方法

适用场景

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

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md9.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

⛔ 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.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

a1

免费

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Turn a research topic into testable questions
  • Narrow an overly broad research question
  • Compare alternative research angles
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills47472026年10月20日 更新

a2

免费

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Comparing theories for a research question
  • Deriving hypotheses from relationships between variables
  • Examining weaknesses and anticipated reviewer objections
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills47472026年10月20日 更新

a5

免费

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • 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-Skills47472026年10月20日 更新

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Planning a paper chapter by chapter
  • Drafting a paper from research materials
  • Turning reviewer comments into a revision roadmap
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills47472026年10月20日 更新

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • 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-Skills47472026年10月20日 更新

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Review a manuscript before journal submission
  • Examine research methods and statistical validity
  • Challenge core arguments and alternative explanations
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills47472026年10月20日 更新

查看 brycewang-stanford 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题