review-paper

review-paper is a skill for Claude Code from pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow. It costs 114 tokens per session (6,571 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A manuscript-review workflow for academic papers, with options for a standard review, an adversarial critic-and-fixer cycle, or a simulated journal peer-review process. Peer review is the evaluation of a research paper by other researchers before publication.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a manuscript, simulate journal decisions, continue a revise-and-resubmit review, or test a draft against demanding criticism.
Why use it?
It helps find weaknesses in a paper and organize the feedback authors may receive from editors and reviewers.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: allowed-tools in frontmatter. Also seen: reads .claude/ paths; mentions subagents.

Needs its repository: it reads a path above its own folder, which exists only inside the repository. The line is **Already received referee comments?** Use [`/respond-to-referees`](../respond-to-referees/SKILL.md) instead. That skill cross-references each referee concern a.

Good fit Use it to review a manuscript, simulate journal decisions, continue a revise-and-resubmit review, or test a draft against demanding criticism.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
About the project

claude-code-my-workflow is a forkable setup for using Claude Code to produce and review academic papers, slides, data analyses, and replication packages. Researchers use its agents, skills, rules, hooks, and quality checks to coordinate these tasks and verify their results. The catalogue entries define the reusable workflow components for Claude Code.

pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow · 1,569 stars · on GitHub · psantanna.com

Install

Getting it into your agent

It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow
agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/review-paper

Made for: Claude Code.

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.

agentmods badge for review-paper

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/review-paper/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/review-paper)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/review-paper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for review-paper

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/review-paper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/review-paper.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 114 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 6,571 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. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 6 findings, up to high

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 →

  • high Agent Snooping · line 350
    Skill reads from agent configuration directories (.claude/, .codex/, .gemini/). These directories may contain API keys, personal settings, and other credentials that the skill has no legitimate need to access.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that access agent configuration directories (.claude/, .codex/, .gemini/). If configuration values are needed, pass them explicitly as parameters or environment variabl
  • medium Agent Snooping · line 478
    Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
  • medium Agent Snooping · line 479
    Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
  • medium Agent Snooping · line 480
    Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
  • medium Agent Snooping · line 480
    Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
  • medium Agent Snooping · line 481
    Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.
    Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
How audits are shown
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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00114 $0.06571
Opus 5 $0.00057 $0.03285
Sonnet 5 $0.00023 $0.01314
Haiku 4.5 $0.00011 $0.00657

Measured 6d ago against content hash c9f5a19d25f1, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-09, from the pricing page.

Security

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 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.

.claude/skills/review-paper/SKILL.md · 483 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 483 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Manuscript Review

Produce a thorough, constructive review of an academic manuscript — the kind of report a top-journal referee would write.

Which review skill do I want?

  • /review-paper (this skill) — single comprehensive report, optional --adversarial critic-fixer loop, or --peer <journal> simulated peer-review pipeline. Best for most drafts.
  • /seven-pass-review — seven independent lenses in parallel (abstract, intro, methods, results, robustness, prose, citations) then synthesized. Heavier (7× token cost). Best for submission-ready drafts or R&R stage where you need maximum coverage.
  • /respond-to-referees — if you already have referee comments and need a response document, not another review.
  • /slide-excellence — for lecture slides, not papers.

Input: $ARGUMENTS — path to a paper (.tex, .pdf, or .qmd), or a filename in master_supporting_docs/. Optional flags:

  • --adversarial — critic-fixer loop (max 5 rounds).
  • --peer <JOURNAL> — simulated peer review pipeline calibrated to <JOURNAL> (see .claude/references/journal-profiles.md for available short names).
  • --r2 / --r3 — R&R continuation mode (requires --peer). Reloads prior round, classifies concerns Resolved / Partial / Not addressed.
  • --stress — hostile-editor stress test (requires --peer). Forces SKEPTIC dispositions, doubles critical peeves.
  • --variance (followed by integer N, default 3) — reviewer-disposition variance mode (requires --peer). Runs N referees with independently sampled dispositions from the 6-way taxonomy. Editor aggregates into a decision distribution, not a point estimate. Mutually exclusive with --stress and --r2/--r3.
  • --no-novelty-check — skip editor's WebSearch novelty probe (default is ON).
  • --no-cross-artifact — skip auto-invocation of /review-r + /audit-reproducibility on referenced scripts.

Already received referee comments? Use /respond-to-referees instead. That skill cross-references each referee concern against the revised manuscript and drafts a complete response document.


Read the full file on GitHub · 483 lines

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.

  1. 6d ago First seen · 483 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A c9f5a19d25f1

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-paper is a skill published in the GitHub repository pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow (1,569 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 114 tokens to every session and 6,571 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-09-03.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories