Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Ingar30/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/Ingar30/reviewer/main/.agents/skills/paper-reviewer/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Ingar30/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/ingar30/reviewer/paper-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ingar30/reviewer/paper-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ingar30/reviewer/paper-reviewer/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/ingar30/reviewer/paper-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ingar30/reviewer/paper-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00033 | $0.01498 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00749 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00300 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00150 |
Grade A, and why
paper-reviewer 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 6d 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 — 86 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Paper Reviewer Skill
This skill runs a reproducible multi-agent paper-review workflow for academic PDFs.
Use this skill when
- the input is an academic paper PDF
- the task is review, auditing, or verification
- the user wants a structured report
- the task involves literature claims, references, numeric checks, or internal cross-references
Do not use this skill when
- the user wants only a summary
- the user wants only proofreading
- the user wants only a rewrite
- parsed artifacts already exist and the request is unrelated to the review pipeline
Default input convention
- If the user names a bare PDF filename, first look for it under
inputs/. - If the user gives a repo-relative path, use it.
- If the user gives an absolute path, use it as provided.
Workflow
For fresh runs, use scripts/review_paper.py as the primary entry point.
The pipeline stages are:
- Resolve the input PDF path.
- Derive
paper_idfrom the filename stem unless explicitly provided. - Preprocess the PDF into
work/<paper_id>/parsed/. - Render run-specific prompts into
work/<paper_id>/prompts/. - Launch preflight reviewers from
config/reviewers.json. - Validate preflight JSON and stop on blocking parser-quality failures.
- Route substantive reviewers around parser-quality warnings using the deterministic artifacts and parser-quality JSON.
- Run the conservative applicability router and record its complete decision in
work/<paper_id>/selection/reviewer_selection.json. Mixed, unknown, or lower-confidence classifications automatically expand to every conditional specialist. - Write the active run roster and selection provenance to
work/<paper_id>/selection/selected_reviewers.json. - Rerender prompts using the selected reviewer roster and parser-quality guidance.
- Launch the 8 universal review-stage reviewers and every applicable conditional specialist. The full roster contains 19 substantive reviewers.
- Validate each reviewer JSON output under
work/<paper_id>/reviews/. - Conservatively normalize reviewer outputs into a precision-first, lossless
work/<paper_id>/editor/normalized_bundle.json. Preserve every source finding's details and do not merge findings merely because they share a quote or path. - Build
work/<paper_id>/editor/editor_input.mdfrom the deterministic editor brief, the lossless bundle, and a compact provenance index. Validate the source reviewer JSON files, but do not duplicate them in the editor input or truncate evidence. - Run the editor to write
outputs/<paper_id>/report.md. - Smoke-check the final report with
scripts/check_final_report.py --bundle work/<paper_id>/editor/normalized_bundle.json.
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.
- 6d ago Changed · -1 lines 5f8bcd013f0e
- 11d ago First seen · 87 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 33883e939f32
paper-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository Ingar30/reviewer (172 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 1,498 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
compile-latex
Compile a Beamer LaTeX slide deck with XeLaTeX (3 passes + bibtex). Use when user says "compile", "build the slides", "rebuild the PDF", "run latex", "render the tex", or asks why a .tex file isn't producing a PDF. Operates on Slides/.tex.
overleaf
Sync and manage Overleaf LaTeX projects from the command line. Pull projects locally, push changes back, compile PDFs, and download compile outputs like .bbl files for arXiv submissions. Use when working with LaTeX, Overleaf, academic papers, or arXiv.
alterlab-treatment-plans
Generates concise (3-4 page), focused medical treatment plans in LaTeX/PDF format across all clinical specialties — general medical treatment, rehabilitation therapy, mental health care, chronic disease management, perioperative care, and pain management — using SMART goal frameworks, evidence-based interventions with…
alterlab-open-notebook
Run Open Notebook, a self-hosted open-source alternative to Google NotebookLM with a full REST API, for AI-powered research and document analysis. Use when organizing research materials into notebooks, ingesting diverse content sources (PDFs, videos, audio, web pages, Office documents), generating AI-powered notes and…
latex-document
Universal LaTeX document skill: create, compile, and convert any document to professional PDF with PNG previews. Supports resumes, reports, cover letters, invoices, academic papers, theses/dissertations, academic CVs, presentations (Beamer), scientific posters, formal letters, exams/quizzes, books, cheat sheets…
compiledeck
Create and compile beautiful Beamer presentations following the Rhetoric of Decks philosophy. Use when making slides, creating decks, or compiling .tex presentation files.