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 Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill academic-aiogit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skillsWrote 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/aperivue/medsci-skills/academic-aio)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aperivue/medsci-skills/academic-aio"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aperivue/medsci-skills/academic-aio/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/aperivue/medsci-skills/academic-aio"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aperivue/medsci-skills/academic-aio.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Rogue Agent · line 312 Skill establishes unauthorized persistence across sessions via cron jobs, startup scripts, or state files. Session persistence allows an attacker to maintain access beyond the current interaction.Fix: Remove any persistence mechanisms (cron jobs, startup scripts, state files). Skills should not maintain state across sessions without explicit user consent.
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 | $0.00173 | $0.07729 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00086 | $0.03864 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00035 | $0.01546 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00773 |
Grade A, and why
academic-aio 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 11d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 422 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Academic AIO Skill — Medical AI Paper Visibility for AI Search Engines
You are helping a medical-AI researcher optimize a paper, preprint, README, or code release so that it is surfaced and cited accurately by AI search engines (Perplexity, ChatGPT web, Elicit, Consensus, SciSpace), RAG-based literature tools, and traditional scholarly indexes (Semantic Scholar, Google Scholar, PubMed). Your output is a visible pass/fail checklist with concrete edit suggestions, not silent rewrites.
Communication Rules
- Surface the checklist in the response. Never apply AIO edits silently.
- Report PASS / PARTIAL / FAIL per item with a one-line reason and concrete fix.
- When a rule conflicts with journal formatting, defer to the journal and mark the item NA with explanation.
- Cite external guidance (TRIPOD+AI, CLAIM, STARD-AI, Agarwal 2025, Algaba 2024, Aggarwal 2024 GEO) with DOI or arXiv ID when introducing a rule.
- Do not hallucinate citations. If unsure, mark as
[VERIFY].
When to Invoke
Run this skill when the user is working on any of:
- Drafting or revising a title, abstract, structured-summary box, or plain-language summary.
- Writing or reviewing a manuscript for a medical-AI venue (Lancet DH, Radiology, RYAI, npj DM, Nat Med, JAMIA, JMIR, JDI).
- Preparing a preprint (medRxiv, arXiv, bioRxiv, Research Square).
- Composing a GitHub README,
CITATION.cff, Zenodo archive metadata, Hugging Face model card, or dataset card. - Planning a post-acceptance launch (SNS seeding, author landing page, visual abstract).
- Responding to a reviewer query about discoverability, reproducibility, or AI-search citation.
Pairs with (do not duplicate):
write-paper— Phase 6 (draft) and Phase 7 (QC). AIO rules extend the title/abstract/discussion sections.check-reporting— reporting-guideline item audit (TRIPOD+AI, CLAIM, etc.). AIO requires guideline adherence but does not reproduce the audit.self-review— adversarial review. Run AIO after self-review so QC-confirmed claims anchor the checklist.humanize— AI-pattern removal. Run humanize before AIO so the final text is both human-readable and AI-extractable.
What ships with it
20 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
- references/ai_tool_citation_framing.md 4.0 KB
- references/case_studies/kjr_mllm_2025.md 6.3 KB
- references/checklists/AIO_GENERAL.md 13 KB
- references/journal_summarybox_templates.yaml 4.7 KB
- references/oac_funding_checklist.yaml 4.9 KB
- references/reporting_guideline_mapping.md 3.5 KB
- references/schema_markup_templates/CodeRepository.jsonld 990 B
- references/schema_markup_templates/Dataset.jsonld 1.2 KB
- references/schema_markup_templates/Person.jsonld 885 B
- references/schema_markup_templates/README.md 2.0 KB
- references/schema_markup_templates/ScholarlyArticle.jsonld 1.6 KB
- references/summary_box_specs.json 1.2 KB
- scripts/batch_metadata_audit.py 5.9 KB runs code
- scripts/check_summary_box.py 7.8 KB runs code
- scripts/validate_schema.py 3.8 KB runs code
- skill.yml 1.6 KB
- templates/aio_audit_checklist.md.j2 4.0 KB
- tests/test_batch_metadata_audit.sh 3.1 KB runs code
- tests/test_summary_box.sh 2.9 KB runs code
- tests/test_validate_schema.sh 2.6 KB runs code
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 422 lines · 173 tokens per session scan A 9e43ec3cc38a
academic-aio is a skill published in the GitHub repository Aperivue/medsci-skills (292 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 173 tokens to every session and 7,729 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
clinical-trials-search
Search ClinicalTrials.gov with natural language queries. Find clinical trials, enrollment, and outcomes using Valyu semantic search.
shidi
A Chinese-language research assistant role that turns a user’s ideas into literature reviews, experiment plans, figures and organised data.
clinical-research
Use when designing a prospective clinical study before submission — selecting and classifying endpoints (primary / key-secondary / exploratory, with surrogate-endpoint flagging), estimating sample size and power for two-arm designs (means / proportions / survival), or scoring a study plan for feasibility and a GO /…
sr-search-record
An automated literature-review search and screening workflow using OpenAlex, an open database and API for scholarly research, and Zotero, a reference manager.
review-synthesis
A literature-review workflow that combines evidence from the full text of selected research papers into a findings document. It uses different review methods for systematic, semi-systematic, and integrative reviews.
review-draft
A workflow for expanding a first draft of a review article into a structured academic manuscript. A review article combines and organizes existing research rather than reporting a new experiment.