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 poemswe/co-researcher --skill literature-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/poemswe/co-researcherWrote 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/poemswe/co-researcher/literature-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/poemswe/co-researcher/literature-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/poemswe/co-researcher/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/poemswe/co-researcher/literature-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/poemswe/co-researcher/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 | $0.00026 | $0.06790 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.02716 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.01358 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00679 |
Grade C, and why
literature-review scanned grade C with 2 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 7d 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.
Downloads and executes remote codehighSupply chain
curl | sh runs whatever the server returns today, which is not necessarily what it returned when this was reviewed.
- **`uv`** must be installed. Verify with `uv --version`. If missing, run the plugin's setup script once: `bash <plugin-root>/scripts/setup.sh`. The setup script installs `uv`, prompts (optionally) for an OpenAlex API ke Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
- **`uv`** must be installed. Verify with `uv --version`. If missing, run the plugin's setup script once: `bash <plugin-root>/scripts/setup.sh`. The setup script installs `uv`, prompts (optionally) for an OpenAlex API ke How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 202 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<search_backend>
This skill owns the command-line search backends in scripts/. They are not separate skills. They handle rate limits and retries automatically via the shared http_client and jats helper modules that sit alongside them in scripts/.
Invocation & workspace (read first): Invoke each script by its absolute path under this skill's base directory (shown to you above as "Base directory for this skill") — e.g. uv run <skill-dir>/scripts/openalex_cli.py …. Never cd into the skill directory. Stay in the directory where the user invoked the skill and anchor the review workspace there with an absolute path: compute WS="$(pwd)/review/{slug}" once at step 1 and pass $WS as --workspace everywhere. Also compute RUN_REPORT="$(dirname "$WS")/$(basename "$WS")-integrity-run.json"; this append-only validation ledger stays outside $WS. Relative review/{slug} resolves against the wrong directory and pollutes the installed plugin. In the command examples below, scripts/… is shorthand for <skill-dir>/scripts/….
Prerequisites:
uvmust be installed. Verify withuv --version. If missing, run the plugin's setup script once:bash <plugin-root>/scripts/setup.sh. The setup script installsuv, prompts (optionally) for an OpenAlex API key, and warms the dependency cache. Fallback if setup is unreachable:curl -LsSf https://astral.sh/uv/install.sh | sh && export PATH="$HOME/.local/bin:$PATH".OPENALEX_API_KEY(optional, recommended). Without it, OpenAlex runs in the unauthenticated polite pool — $0.01/day budget, ~10filterqueries or 1--searchper day before throttling. With a free key, $1/day budget at ~10 req/s. The key lives in~/.env. Never read, print,cat,echo, or otherwise inspect~/.env— credentials must stay out of the agent's context. If the user needs to add a key without leaking it, give them:printf "Enter OpenAlex API key (hidden): " && read -s k && echo && printf "OPENALEX_API_KEY=%s\n" "$k" >> ~/.env && unset k && echo "Saved.".
1. OpenAlex — scripts/openalex_cli.py (cross-disciplinary, ~250M works)
Use as the default broad search. Full reference: references/openalex/works.md, authors.md, topics.md, etc.
uv run scripts/openalex_cli.py filter works \
--search "your query" \
--filter "publication_year:>2019,type:article" \
--sort "cited_by_count:desc" \
--select "id,doi,title,publication_year,authorships,cited_by_count,abstract_inverted_index" \
--per-page 10 > openalex.json
Raw --search alone pulls topical noise (off-topic gen-AI papers ranking high). For a focused corpus, foreground concept/topic filters: resolve the topic via references/openalex/topics.md, then narrow with --filter "topics.id:T<id>" (or concepts.id:C<id>) and use --search only to rank within that slice. Never pair a raw --search with --sort "cited_by_count:desc" — that ranks by fame rather than relevance and fills the pool with landmark papers that merely contain your keywords. Searching "large language model abstract screening" that way returns the WGCNA R package, the PRISMA Statement, and Rayyan; dropping the sort surfaces the actual LLM-screening papers instead. Sort by citations only inside an already-narrow topic filter. The script prints the total hitCount/result count — log it as the query's hit count.
What ships with it
31 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.
- references/arxiv/query_syntax.md 997 B
- references/openalex/authors.md 3.6 KB
- references/openalex/geo_and_language.md 1.9 KB
- references/openalex/institutions.md 2.7 KB
- references/openalex/publishers_funders.md 2.5 KB
- references/openalex/sources.md 3.8 KB
- references/openalex/taxonomy.md 2.8 KB
- references/openalex/topics.md 2.4 KB
- references/openalex/type_values.md 3.6 KB
- references/openalex/works.md 17 KB
- scripts/build_corpus.py 8.3 KB runs code
- scripts/check_claims.py 50 KB runs code
- scripts/europepmc_api.py 6.6 KB runs code
- scripts/http_client.py 8.0 KB runs code
- scripts/import_library.py 5.9 KB runs code
- scripts/jats.py 2.4 KB runs code
- scripts/library_sources.py 6.2 KB runs code
- scripts/openalex_cli.py 5.2 KB runs code
- scripts/prisma_counts.py 3.5 KB runs code
- scripts/read_paper.py 12 KB runs code
- scripts/review_integrity/__init__.py 805 B runs code
- scripts/review_integrity/models.py 24 KB runs code
- scripts/review_integrity/repair.py 6.2 KB runs code
- scripts/review_integrity/reporting.py 13 KB runs code
- scripts/review_integrity/scoring.py 18 KB runs code
- scripts/review_integrity/validators.py 29 KB runs code
- scripts/review_integrity/workspace.py 27 KB runs code
- scripts/search_arxiv.py 3.9 KB runs code
- scripts/validate_review.py 26 KB runs code
- scripts/verify_citations.py 24 KB runs code
- scripts/zotero_local.py 3.9 KB runs code
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.
- 7d ago Changed · +10 lines 26e50ba30f86
- 10d ago Changed daf0d8df1178
- 13d ago Changed 558164d6af94
- 15d ago Changed 885881f97340
- 16d ago Changed · +45 lines 2244e971509d
- 1mo ago First seen · 147 lines · 26 tokens per session scan C ba7ffd160e0d
literature-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository poemswe/co-researcher (135 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 6,790 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it C with 2 findings (downloads and executes remote code, makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
refactor-research-code
Clean research code for public release while preserving reported results. Uses releaseaudit.py to separate safe mechanical cleanup from ask-first behavior risks and identity leaks. Use for release-ready repos, dead experiment branches, config extraction, documented entrypoints, and double-blind code cleanup.
prepare-artifacts
Prepares a reproducibility artifact (code/data) for submission and badging. Use when a researcher says "artifact evaluation", "artifact appendix", "reproducibility", "badge", "Artifacts Available/Evaluated/Functional/Reusable", "Results Reproduced/Replicated", "ACM badging", "USENIX/OSDI/SOSP AE", "SIGMOD ARI"…
simulate-reviewers
Venue-calibrated peer-review simulation. Use when a researcher says "simulate reviewers", "mock review", "review my paper like a NeurIPS reviewer", "what would Reviewer 2 say", "red-team my paper", "find weaknesses before I submit", "peer review my paper", "strengths and weaknesses / pros and cons of my paper", "what…
verify-results
Check whether reported paper metrics are consistent with outputs from the local code artifact. Use for result reproduction checks, artifact evaluation, reproducibility checklists, code-versus-paper audits, table or claim metric comparisons, and badge-readiness review.
anonymize-paper
Deep anonymization sweep for double-blind paper submissions, plus clean de-anonymization for camera-ready. Use when a researcher says "anonymize my paper", "double-blind check", "blind this submission", "remove author names", "did I leak my identity" — or, after acceptance, "de-anonymize" / "restore authors for…
make-slides
Builds a conference talk deck (Beamer or Marp markdown) from a paper draft - problem-first narrative, one claim per slide, figures reused straight from the paper's LaTeX source, sized to the real slot (12-20 minute full talk vs 5-minute lightning). Use when the user asks to make slides, build a presentation or talk…