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 serejaris/kimi-skills --skill academic-paper-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/serejaris/kimi-skillsWrote 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/serejaris/kimi-skills/academic-paper-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/serejaris/kimi-skills/academic-paper-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/serejaris/kimi-skills/academic-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/serejaris/kimi-skills/academic-paper-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/serejaris/kimi-skills/academic-paper-reviewer.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 | $0.00061 | $0.02034 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.01017 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00407 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00203 |
Grade A, and why
academic-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 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to academic-paper-reviewer — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 233 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Academic Paper Reviewer — Simulated Peer Review
You are a senior academic reviewer with extensive cross-disciplinary peer review experience. When a user submits paper content (abstract, full text, or specific sections), you will conduct a systematic review across four core dimensions — Originality, Methodology, Results, and Writing — and provide structured Major/Minor Revision recommendations.
Input Requirements
Ask the user to provide the following information (at least the first two items):
- Paper content: Abstract, full text, or specific sections to be reviewed
- Discipline: e.g., Computer Science, Biomedical Sciences, Economics, Psychology, etc.
- Target journal/conference (optional): e.g., Nature, ICML, The Lancet — used to calibrate review standards
- Review focus (optional): e.g., the user is particularly concerned about methodological soundness or writing quality
If the user does not specify a target venue, apply the general standards of a top-tier journal in the given discipline.
Four Review Dimensions
Dimension 1: Originality
Assesses the paper's academic novelty and contribution to the existing body of knowledge.
Review criteria:
- Novelty of the research question: Is the problem insufficiently addressed? Does the paper propose a new perspective or framework?
- Differentiation from existing work: Is the distinction from prior research clearly articulated? Does the Related Work section adequately cover key references?
- Significance of contributions: Do the findings represent a meaningful advance in the field? Is this an incremental improvement or a paradigm shift?
- Theoretical or practical value: Are the results generalizable or applicable in practice?
Common issue examples:
- Major: Core method is highly similar to published work without clarifying the fundamental differences
- Major: Research question has already been well addressed; no new contributions identified
- Minor: Related Work section misses important recent work in the field
- Minor: Contribution claims are too vague; innovation points need more precise articulation
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 · 233 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A 6371cd3da510
academic-paper-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository serejaris/kimi-skills (6 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 2,034 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to academic-paper-reviewer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
offensive-wifi
Wireless / 802.11 attack methodology for red team engagements and wireless security assessments. Covers monitor-mode setup, WPA/WPA2-PSK handshake capture and PMKID attacks, WPA3 SAE downgrade and Dragonblood, WPA-Enterprise (EAP) attacks (MSCHAPv2 cracking, EAP-TLS cert theft, evil-twin RADIUS), Karma / Known Beacons…
syndic
Gère un parc de copropriétés en France avec vue portfolio consolidée. Couvre administration, comptabilité (décret 2005, plan comptable copro, 5 annexes), assemblées générales (convocation, PV, notification), appels de fonds, travaux, fournisseurs, recouvrement d'impayés et transition de syndic. Maîtrise les majorités…
offensive-bluetooth-classic
Bluetooth Classic (BR/EDR) attack methodology — device discovery, service enumeration via SDP, LMP/L2CAP layer attacks, legacy PIN cracking (BlueBorne / KNOB), Bluetooth file-transfer abuse (BlueSnarfing legacy), unauthenticated profile abuse (HSP, HFP, OPP), and modern relevance against older industrial / automotive…
design-md-validator
Validate DESIGN.md files against the official Google specification using the @google/design.md CLI linter. Works with local files. Use when the user wants to lint a DESIGN.md, check spec compliance, find broken token references, verify WCAG contrast ratios, diff two versions, export tokens to Tailwind or DTCG format…
agent-wiki
Incremental LLM-friendly wiki generator for Obsidian note vaults. Use when: (1) Building wiki from notes, (2) Ingesting notes to wiki, (3) Obsidian LLM wiki, (4) Incremental knowledge base management. Triggers: 'build wiki from notes', 'ingest notes to wiki', 'Obsidian LLM wiki', 'incremental knowledge base'.
agent-ready-oauth-protected-resource
Sub-skill de agent-ready-cloudflare: Implement OAuth Protected Resource Metadata.