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 Charlielin-Fan/academic-research-plugin --skill academic-literature-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Charlielin-Fan/academic-research-pluginWrote 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/charlielin-fan/academic-research-plugin/academic-literature-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/charlielin-fan/academic-research-plugin/academic-literature-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/charlielin-fan/academic-research-plugin/academic-literature-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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/charlielin-fan/academic-research-plugin/academic-literature-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/charlielin-fan/academic-research-plugin/academic-literature-review.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 | $0.00053 | $0.00682 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00341 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00136 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
academic-literature-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 12d 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 — 45 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Academic literature review
Use this skill for one scholarly-review workflow: retrieval, evidence resolution, relevant graph expansion, and evidence-grounded synthesis. The MCP server supplies live scholarly metadata and supported full text; this skill supplies the order of operations and evidence boundaries.
Required input and output
Parse the research question and every explicit constraint before calling a tool. Preserve requested scope such as date range, language, study type, population, intervention, comparator, outcome, and identifier constraints. If a required constraint is missing or ambiguous, ask a focused follow-up question before proceeding.
Return a traceable review. For each material claim, identify the stable paper identifier returned by the tools and label the evidence as one of:
Metadata-onlyAbstract-supportedFull-text-supportedNon-text evidence not interpreted
Disclose provider degradation, unavailable full text, identifier conflicts, and unsupported non-text evidence in the result. Keep retrieved rank separate from analytical importance.
Mandatory workflow
Follow these steps in order.
- Parse the research question and explicit constraints.
- Call
search_papersfor the baseline scholarly retrieval. Do not substitute ordinary web search for this baseline. - Inspect the search result’s provider-degradation information. Use
provider_statusonly when the returned status is insufficient to explain material coverage loss, and disclose that loss. - Keep each returned retrieval rank distinct from any later judgment about analytical importance.
- When a paper is central to a factual claim, call
get_paperto resolve its identifiers and metadata. - Call
get_full_textwhen the requested analysis depends on details that metadata or an abstract cannot safely support. - Call
get_referencesorget_citationsonly when backward or forward chaining is relevant to the research question. Do not expand graph breadth without a research reason. - Distinguish explicitly between discovered metadata, abstract evidence, parsed full-text evidence, and model synthesis.
- Cite claims to stable paper identifiers and state the evidence level beside the claim or in the claim’s evidence record.
- Report unavailable full text, provider degradation, identifier conflicts, and unsupported non-text evidence explicitly.
- Never fabricate a DOI, quotation, page number, sample size, effect estimate, or study result.
- For a requested literature review, synthesize disagreements and limitations rather than collapsing all papers into a single consensus statement.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 45 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A bd4aaa20e1ed
academic-literature-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Charlielin-Fan/academic-research-plugin (2 stars, last pushed 23d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 682 once invoked, about $0.0003 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…