Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to FilippoScaramuzza/agentic-reviewer. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/FilippoScaramuzza/agentic-reviewer/main/.agents/skills/review-paper/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/FilippoScaramuzza/agentic-reviewerWrote 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/filipposcaramuzza/agentic-reviewer/review-paper)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/filipposcaramuzza/agentic-reviewer/review-paper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/filipposcaramuzza/agentic-reviewer/review-paper/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/filipposcaramuzza/agentic-reviewer/review-paper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/filipposcaramuzza/agentic-reviewer/review-paper.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00386 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00193 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00077 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00039 |
Grade A, and why
review-paper 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.
What it actually says
Review Paper
Run the repository's paper review workflow from prompts/editor-in-chief.txt.
Inputs required from the user:
- Paper path, usually under
papers/ - Target journal or conference name
If either input is missing, ask for it before starting.
Workflow
- Create
reports/<journal-slug>/<YYYY-MM-DD-HHMMSS>/. - Write
00-session-info.md. - If the paper is not Markdown, use the
paper-converteragent to convert it. - Check
context/<journal-slug>/for cached journal context. - Unless the user says
re-explore, reuse cached context only when all four files exist:scope-and-criteria.mdrecent-papers-analysis.mdstyle-guide.mdreputation-profile.md
- If context is missing, stale, or incomplete, run only the exploration agents needed to produce missing or stale files:
scope-explorerrecent-papers-explorerstyle-guide-explorerreputation-explorer
- After exploration is complete, run the reviewer agents:
scope-reviewermethodology-reviewerwriting-style-reviewerstatistics-reviewerethics-reviewer
- After all reviewer outputs exist, use
report-compiler.
Output Contract
All session artifacts must be written to the timestamped report directory:
reports/<journal-slug>/<YYYY-MM-DD-HHMMSS>/
Do not write review artifacts to reviews/.
Do not commit changes unless the user explicitly asks.
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 · 52 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 499ab71ba265
review-paper is a skill published in the GitHub repository FilippoScaramuzza/agentic-reviewer (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 386 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
wiki-ingest
Compile a raw source (document, URL content, meeting notes, research output) into a wikikit agent wiki — merge-don't-overwrite, log contradictions, maintain cross-references, then lint. Use whenever the user says "add this to the wiki", "ingest this", or drops new source material for a wiki maintained with…
ingest-wiki
The write engine for the twoweeks wiki. Use this skill for four modes: ingest (process files staged in rawinput/), direct-update (apply explicit wiki edits), lint (validate structure, links, metadata, and drift), and save-output (persist an answer, audit, analysis, or report to wiki/outputs/). Read WIKISCHEMA.md first…
ingest-wiki
The hybrid write engine for a wiki vault that combines twoweeks-style durable knowledge management with Karpathy-style execution discipline. Supports four modes: ingest, direct-update, lint, and save-output. Read WIKISCHEMA.md first if present, then CLAUDE.md. Mutating operations require CLAUDE.md.
karpathy-guidelines
Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring code to avoid overcomplication, make surgical changes, surface assumptions, and define verifiable success criteria.
deploy-docker-compose
Run the Omnigent server as a Docker compose stack (server + Postgres) on any Docker host — your laptop, a VPS, EC2 by hand, or as the base layer of any container-platform deploy. Invoke when the user wants to build the image, bring up the compose stack, debug the stack on a host they already have, or extend the stack…
security-audit
Audit a codebase or directory for security issues (hardcoded secrets, injection, unsafe deserialization, weak crypto, authz gaps) and produce a structured findings report. Use when the user asks for a security review, an audit, or to check code for vulnerabilities. Report only — never fix.