What is research-paper-review?

A guide for reviewing academic papers, which are formal reports of research findings. It helps examine summaries, methods, evidence, originality, and conclusions.

Use it to summarize or critique papers, compare studies, assess novelty and methods, prepare peer reviews, or improve a paper before submission. It can work from a PDF, LaTeX source, or plain text and can consider a target conference, journal, or preprint.

It provides a consistent way to understand and question a paper instead of relying on a quick impression. It can also help find statistical or numerical inconsistencies before publication.

research-paper-review — Skill by BESSER-PEARL/research-agent-skills

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.

Any agent

npx skills add BESSER-PEARL/research-agent-skills --skill research-paper-review

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/BESSER-PEARL/research-agent-skills

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/besser-pearl/research-agent-skills/research-paper-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/besser-pearl/research-agent-skills/research-paper-review)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/besser-pearl/research-agent-skills/research-paper-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/besser-pearl/research-agent-skills/research-paper-review/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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/besser-pearl/research-agent-skills/research-paper-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/besser-pearl/research-agent-skills/research-paper-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 87 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.

When invoked 2,041 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.

Model	Per session	Once invoked
Fable 5.1	$0.00087	$0.02041
Opus 5.5	$0.00035	$0.00816
Sonnet 5.5	$0.00017	$0.00408
Haiku 4.5	$0.00009	$0.00204

Measured 2mo ago against content hash 5dab824b1af2, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

research-paper-review 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 2mo 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.

research-paper-review/SKILL.md · 157 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 157 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Research Paper Review

Assist researchers in reviewing, analyzing, and criticizing academic papers systematically and thoroughly.

When to Use

User asks to review, summarize, or critique a research paper
User shares a PDF or link to an academic paper
User wants to assess methodology, contributions, or novelty
User needs help writing a peer review
User wants to compare multiple papers or do a literature survey
User wants to improve a paper before submission (pre-submission review)
User wants to check for numerical/statistical inconsistencies
User wants venue-specific feedback (conference, journal, or preprint)

Inputs

Paper content: PDF, LaTeX source, or plaint text
Target Venue (optional but recommended): conference, journal, or preprint target - Example: "Models 2026", "TOSEM", "Sosym", "arXiv preprint"
Type of paper (important — ask the user if not provided): the review criteria change substantially by type. Common types: "full research" paper, "short" paper, "new ideas"/vision paper, "tool demo" paper, "poster", "extended abstract"/"short abstract", "journal"/"extended" paper. If the user does not state the type, ask before reviewing (or state the assumed type explicitly in the review).
Explicit reviewing guidelines (optional): if available provide a description or URL with the reviewing criteria.

Review Workflow

###Step 0: Pre-Processing / Venue Context

If target venue and/or the type of paper are provided, include them as context for all subsequent steps:

“Review this paper as if it is intended for [TARGET VENUE] as a [TYPE PAPER] submission. Consider typical standards, expectations, page limits, scope, and audience for this venue and type of paper”

Calibrate expectations to the paper type. Do not apply full-paper standards to every submission. In particular, do not fault a paper for missing something its type does not require (e.g., do not criticize a tool demo paper for lacking a real-world validation study, or a vision paper for lacking large-scale experiments). Use the table below as the baseline, then adjust with the venue's own guidelines:

Read the full file on GitHub · 157 lines

Files

What ships with it

2 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.

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.

2mo ago First seen · 157 lines · 87 tokens per session scan A 5dab824b1af2

Subscribe to this mod's changes

research-paper-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository BESSER-PEARL/research-agent-skills (18 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 87 tokens to every session and 2,041 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.

Research Scientific academic agent-skills ai-agent besser paper-review skills-sh

research-paper-review next to 6 skills from other repositories
Mod	Type	Stars	Last push	Licence	Scan	Tokens	Works with
research-paper-reviewBESSER-PEARL/research-agent-skills	Skill	18	17d ago	MIT	A	87	Claude Code, Codex
research-codeConmuYan/my-academic-skills	Skill	2	2mo ago	MIT	A	121	Claude Code
awesome-abstractConmuYan/my-academic-skills	Skill	2	2mo ago	MIT	A	127	Claude Code
graph-fraudConmuYan/my-academic-skills	Skill	2	2mo ago	MIT	A	139	Claude Code
html-ppt-zhangzara-pin-and-papernexu-io/open-design	Skill	106k	yesterday	Apache-2.0	A	51	Claude Code, Codex
acdemic-drawingpoco-ai/Agentero	Skill	1.1k	yesterday	MIT	A	30	Claude Code, Codex
paper-verificationfcakyon/phd-skills	Skill	438	26d ago	MIT	A	67	Claude Code