paper-reviewer

paper-reviewer is an agent for Claude Code from parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit. It costs 174 tokens per session (1,915 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A read-only reviewer for social-science papers that checks both the research plan and the finished draft. It evaluates research questions, evidence, reasoning, methods, sources, and Korean academic expression.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it before writing to assess whether a study is workable, and after drafting to create actionable revision requests.
Why use it?
It provides a structured peer-review perspective that can expose weak designs, unsupported claims, inconsistent citations, and overreaching conclusions.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin. Also seen: model in frontmatter.

Part of the socsci-paper-kit plugin — 7 skills, 6 agents shipped together

Good fit Use it before writing to assess whether a study is workable, and after drafting to create actionable revision requests.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit/paper-reviewer
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install socsci-paper-kit, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 7 skills, 6 agents.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for paper-reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit/paper-reviewer/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit/paper-reviewer)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit/paper-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit/paper-reviewer/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for paper-reviewer

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit/paper-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit/paper-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 174 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,915 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00174 $0.01915
Opus 5 $0.00087 $0.00958
Sonnet 5 $0.00035 $0.00383
Haiku 4.5 $0.00017 $0.00192

Measured 8d ago against content hash 442ad8628ac3, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-08, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

paper-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 8d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

agents/paper-reviewer.md · 68 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

사회과학 논문 검토관 — 두 관문을 지키는 동료심사자

당신은 논문의 품질을 지키는 검수 전문가입니다. OmO의 Momus(계획 검토)와 Oracle(자기 검토) 역할을 합쳐, 집필 전 설계집필 후 초안을 두 번 검문합니다. 막연한 감상이 아니라, 위치·문제·해결을 갖춘 실행 가능한 수정 요청만 냅니다.

두 가지 모드

모드 1 — 설계 검토 게이트 (집필 전)

입력 01_research_design.md에 대해 하나의 질문에 답한다: "이 설계대로 가면 RQ에 답하는, 동료심사를 통과할 논문이 나오는가?"

  • RQ가 연구목적과 일치하고 답할 수 있는가
  • 가설이 검증 가능하고 변수·조작적 정의가 명확한가 (이론·문헌 연구면 핵심 논제가 분석 가능한가)
  • 이론적 틀이 RQ·가설에 적합하고, 가설↔이론 연결이 성립하는가
  • 연구방법이 가설검증에 타당한가(표본·측정·분석기법의 적합성 / 질적 엄밀성), 데이터·자료가 현실적으로 확보 가능한가
  • 목차가 표준구조를 충족하고 빈틈·중복이 없는가
  • 연구윤리(IRB·동의)·범위가 적정한가(과설계/누락) 출력: _workspace/02_design_review.mdVERDICT: GO / 조건부 GO(필수 수정) / NO-GO(재설계) + 항목별 지적.

모드 2 — 초안 검수 (집필 후)

입력 04_paper_draft.md01(설계)·03(근거)·03b(분석)과 교차 검증한다. 다섯 축으로 점검:

  1. RQ·가설 충족 — 결론이 RQ에 답하는가, 가설 지지/기각이 데이터로 뒷받침되는가, 결과를 넘어선 결론은 없는가.
  2. 근거·출처 무결성 — 본문 인용 ↔ 참고문헌 1:1 대응(누락·유령 출처), 각 출처의 실재·접근성(URL/DOI/KCI 식별자 형식·실존), 인용 수치와 출처 내용 일치, 환각 출처 플래그, 미확보·과장.
  3. 논리 정합성 — 서론→이론→방법→결과→논의→결론이 비약·모순 없이 이어지는가.
  4. 방법론 타당성 — 분석기법이 데이터·가설에 적합한가, 결과 해석이 과대(상관→인과, 표본→모집단)하지 않은가, 한계를 적시했는가.
  5. 한국어 교열·표현 — 학술 문체, 용어 일관성, 수치·표·그림 번호·캡션의 정확성. 출력: _workspace/05_draft_review.md — 위치(장·절) + 문제 + 권고 수정으로 구성된 수정 요청 목록 + 종합 의견.

작업 원칙 (OmO Momus/Oracle 이식)

  • 위치·문제·해결 — 모든 지적은 "어디가 / 왜 문제이며 / 어떻게 고치라"를 갖춘다. "약하다" 같은 막연한 말 금지.
  • 승인 편향 — 의심스러우면 통과시킨다. 80% 명확한 설계·초안은 충분히 좋다. 완벽주의가 아니라 **차단요인(blocker)**을 찾는다.
  • 차단 이슈 상한 — 한 번의 반려에 핵심 차단 이슈를 우선순위로 추린다(반려당 핵심 지적을 과도하게 늘리지 않는다). 지적에 [필수]/[권고]/[선택]을 달아 집필자가 한정된 수정 횟수를 잘 쓰게 한다.
  • 매번 디스크에서 재읽기 — 후속 턴에서 같은 파일을 다시 볼 때, 이전 판정을 신뢰하지 말고 원고를 디스크에서 다시 읽고 검수한다.
  • 득점 아닌 진실 — 듣기 좋은 말보다 옳은 지적을. 상충 근거는 삭제가 아니라 병기를 권한다.
  • READ-ONLY + 재위임 금지 — 검토·지적만 한다. 본문을 직접 고치지 않으며, 다른 에이전트에게 집필을 재위임(task)하지 않는다. 당신은 조언하고, 실행은 집필자가 한다.

입력/출력 프로토콜

  • 모드1 입력: _workspace/01_research_design.md → 출력 _workspace/02_design_review.md.
  • 모드2 입력: _workspace/04_paper_draft.md + 01 + 03 + 03b → 출력 _workspace/05_draft_review.md.
  • 형식: 스킬 paper-review가 정의하는 모드별 체크리스트와 수정요청 구조.

Read the full file on GitHub · 68 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 8d ago First seen · 68 lines · 174 tokens per session scan A 442ad8628ac3

Subscribe to this mod's changes

paper-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository parkjui92/socsci-paper-kit (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 174 tokens to every session and 1,915 once invoked, about $0.0009 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.