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.
npx skills add adolinjonathan-bot/zotero-toolkit --skill document-analysisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/adolinjonathan-bot/zotero-toolkitWrote 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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/adolinjonathan-bot/zotero-toolkit/document-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/adolinjonathan-bot/zotero-toolkit/document-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/adolinjonathan-bot/zotero-toolkit/document-analysis/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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/adolinjonathan-bot/zotero-toolkit/document-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/adolinjonathan-bot/zotero-toolkit/document-analysis.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00044 | $0.00834 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00334 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00167 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00083 |
Grade A, and why
document-analysis 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 today.
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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 50 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Document Analysis Skill
Use this skill when extracting structured study characteristics, PICO elements, empirical findings, or methodological quality indicators from papers stored in a Zotero library via zotero-mcp-server.
Core Principles
- Read the full text, not just the abstract. Abstracts routinely omit sample sizes, subgroup results, and methodological limitations. Always use
zotero_get_item_fulltextwhen extracting study data. - Paginate through the entire paper.
zotero_get_item_fulltextreturns chunks (default 25,000 characters) and reportsreturnedTo/totalCharacters. Continue calling withstart_atuntil you have covered the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections. - Never infer or fabricate missing values. If a paper does not state a field (e.g. attrition rate, confidence interval, funding source), record
"not reported"explicitly. - Quote verbatim for every extracted number. Alongside any quantitative figure (sample size, effect size, p-value, prevalence), include the exact sentence from the paper so the reviewer can verify it immediately.
- Surface un-indexed or scanned PDFs plainly. If
zotero_get_item_fulltextreports no attachment or an empty index (an un-OCR'd scan), list the item separately as requiring OCR or manual extraction rather than silently falling back to the abstract.
Extraction Workflow
1. Define the Extraction Schema
Before reading papers, confirm the target columns with the user. Common templates:
- Intervention / Clinical (PICO):
Author (Year) | Country/Setting | Study Design | Population & Sample Size (N) | Intervention | Comparator | Primary Outcomes & Effect Sizes | Limitations - Scoping / Policy Review (PCC):
Author (Year) | Document Type | Jurisdiction/Region | Target Population | Core Concept/Policy Mechanism | Key Findings | Recommendations - Methodological / ML Review:
Author (Year) | Task/Domain | Dataset(s) | Model/Architecture | Evaluation Metrics | Baseline Comparison | Code/Data Availability
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.
- today First seen · 50 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 16ef455add1b
document-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository adolinjonathan-bot/zotero-toolkit (1 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 834 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-10-24.
Other skills, from other repositories
academic-writing
You must use this when producing any research prose — literature reviews, syntheses, analyses, methodology descriptions, discussion sections, abstracts, or any written output intended for an academic audience.
systematic-review
You must use this when conducting PRISMA-standard systematic reviews, protocol development, or Risk of Bias assessment.
hypothesis-testing
You must use this when formulating testable hypotheses, designing experimental controls, or defining falsification criteria.
quantitative-analysis
You must use this when selecting statistical tests, interpreting effect sizes, or conducting power analysis.
research-synthesis
You must use this when merging findings from multiple studies into a coherent narrative with grounded evidence.
literature-review
You must use this when synthesizing existing knowledge, identifying research gaps, or tracing the evolution of scientific ideas.