跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

zotero-obsidian-bridge

Turn papers stored in Zotero into detailed Obsidian reading notes, linking claims, methods, evidence, and limitations to a project. Synthesize findings across papers, track note coverage for entire collections, and build a visual literature map.

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

Use this skill when papers are collected in Zotero but the user wants detailed reading notes, project-linked literature synthesis, collection-wide paper-note coverage checks, and a connected knowledge map inside the bound Obsidian project knowledge base.

集成工具Obsidian

实测评分 未实测

查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Creating detailed Obsidian notes from Zotero papers
  • Comparing methods and identifying research gaps across papers
  • Checking note coverage for a whole Zotero collection
  • Mapping relationships among papers and their claims

包含的文件(7)

  • SKILL.md5.8 KB
  • examples/example-collection-inventory.md746 B
  • references/COLLECTION-INVENTORY-SCHEMA.md1.1 KB
  • references/LOCAL-ZOTERO-FALLBACK.md788 B
  • references/PAPER-NOTE-SCHEMA.md1.8 KB
  • references/WORKFLOW.md3.2 KB
  • scripts/verify_paper_notes.py7.2 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Zotero Obsidian Bridge

Bridge Zotero as the literature source of truth with Obsidian as the durable project knowledge base.

Use this skill when the user wants to:

  • collect and organize papers in Zotero,
  • read papers from Zotero MCP,
  • create or update one detailed paper note per paper under Obsidian Papers/,
  • synthesize those notes into Knowledge/ notes,
  • verify that a whole Zotero collection has complete canonical note coverage,
  • visualize the literature structure as a default Obsidian canvas.

Core stance

  • Zotero owns collection, metadata, attachments, PDF full text, annotations.
  • Obsidian owns durable reading notes, project-facing literature knowledge, cross-note links, synthesis.
  • Prefer one canonical paper note per paper.
  • Prefer filesystem-first Obsidian notes; do not require Obsidian MCP.
  • Use this as an explicit, agent-first skill for Zotero ingestion.
  • Prefer Papers/ + Knowledge/ as the default bridge targets.
  • Prefer Maps/literature.canvas as the default graph artifact.
  • Prefer a strong review schema inside each canonical paper note:
    • Claim
    • Method
    • Evidence
    • Limitation
    • Direct relevance to repo
    • Relation to other papers
  • Treat some Zotero webpage items as valid literature sources when they still expose useful metadata, attachment text, or fulltext.

Default workflow

  1. Resolve the current project via $obsidian-project-memory.
    • If the repo is already bound, use the existing vault.
    • If it looks like a research repo but is not bound, bootstrap it first.
  2. Read Zotero items from the target collection/query.
    • If the user asked for a full collection pass, prefer full coverage over a small representative subset.
    • If the transport path through MCP is failing but a local zotero-mcp source checkout or Python environment is available, use that local fallback to read metadata/fulltext instead of stopping the workflow.
  3. For each paper:
    • get metadata,
    • get full text when available,
    • get annotations/notes when helpful,
    • create or update the canonical paper note in Papers/.
  4. Add project-facing structure to each paper note:
    • claim,
    • research question,
    • method,
    • evidence,
    • strengths,
    • limitation,
    • direct relevance to repo,
    • relation to other papers,
    • links to related papers and the best matching Knowledge/ notes.
  5. Synthesize the batch into durable Knowledge/ notes such as:
    • Knowledge/Literature-Overview.md
    • Knowledge/Method-Families.md
    • Knowledge/Research-Gaps.md only when the synthesis is stable enough to deserve a canonical note.
  6. If the request is collection-scoped, update a durable inventory note that records:
    • collection size,
    • item triage,
    • item -> canonical note mapping,
    • current coverage count such as 16 / 16.
    • use the canonical inventory path Knowledge/Zotero-Collection-{collection-slug}-Inventory.md.
  7. Refresh Maps/literature.canvas.
    • Prefer semantic filtering and edge thinning.
    • Prefer argument-map structure (paper + claim + method + gap) over dense all-to-all paper links.
    • If needed, keep a second lightweight display canvas such as Maps/literature-main.canvas.
  8. If the user also wants writing deliverables, update:
    • Writing/literature-review.md
    • Writing/comparison-matrix.md
  9. Update today's Daily/ note and repo-local project memory.
  10. Run a deterministic verification pass after batch ingestion or schema refactors.

Default outputs

  • Papers/*.md - one detailed reading note per paper
  • Knowledge/*.md - durable literature synthesis notes when the batch yields stable knowledge
  • Knowledge/Zotero-Collection-{collection-slug}-Inventory.md - when the source is a concrete Zotero collection and coverage tracking matters
  • Maps/literature.canvas - default visual literature graph
  • Maps/literature-main.canvas - optional lightweight presentation graph after semantic filtering
  • Writing/literature-review.md - when the user asks for synthesis
  • Writing/comparison-matrix.md - when cross-paper comparison is useful

Safety rules

  • Do not dump raw full text into Obsidian.
  • Do not create a new note if the canonical paper note already exists.
  • Do not create Concepts/ or Datasets/ trees by default.
  • Do not treat Experiments/, Results/, or Writing/ as the default bridge target during Zotero ingestion.
  • Do not force every relationship into a new note; use frontmatter fields, sections, wikilinks, and linked_knowledge first.
  • If a relationship is uncertain, record it in the note body or Daily/ instead of manufacturing durable structure.
  • Do not stop at a representative subset if the user explicitly asked to check all papers in a collection.
  • Do not leave schema drift unresolved across notes in the same collection after a batch pass.

References

Load only what is needed:

  • references/WORKFLOW.md - end-to-end Zotero -> Obsidian procedure
  • references/PAPER-NOTE-SCHEMA.md - detailed paper note fields and sections
  • references/COLLECTION-INVENTORY-SCHEMA.md - canonical inventory note naming and mapping contract
  • references/LOCAL-ZOTERO-FALLBACK.md - local fallback runbook when MCP transport fails
  • examples/example-collection-inventory.md - example inventory note
  • scripts/verify_paper_notes.py - deterministic schema, zotero-key, and inventory consistency check
  • ../obsidian-literature-workflow/references/PAPER-NOTE-SCHEMA.md - shared note schema
  • ../obsidian-literature-workflow/references/CANVAS-WORKFLOW.md - default literature canvas refresh rules

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-Skills47572026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-Skills47572026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-Skills47572026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-Skills47572026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-Skills47572026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-Skills47572026年10月20日 更新

查看 brycewang-stanford 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题