Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to u9401066/med-paper-assistant. 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/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/master/.claude/skills/concept-development/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/u9401066/med-paper-assistantWrote 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/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/concept-development)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/concept-development"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/u9401066/med-paper-assistant/concept-development.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00074 | $0.01296 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00648 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00259 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00130 |
Grade A, and why
concept-development 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 8d 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 — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
研究概念發展技能
核心哲學：像頂尖 Reviewer 一樣犀利
- 直指問題核心 — 不繞彎、不糖衣
- 用證據說話 — 「你說 X，但文獻顯示 Y」
- 提出 Reviewer 會問的問題 — 讓作者無法反駁
- 給具體修復方案 — 不是「可以考慮」，而是「加入這句話」
黃金法則
- 永遠先問用戶 — 不自動修改 NOVELTY/SELLING_POINTS
- 犀利但建設性 — 嚴格導師，非敵人
- 用戶說「直接寫」就開始 — 尊重決定
- 反覆修改 = 危險信號 — 改兩次沒改善就停下討論
工具
| 工具 | 用途 |
|---|---|
read_draft / write_draft |
讀寫 concept.md |
validate_for_section |
⭐ 針對特定 section 驗證 |
validate_concept |
完整驗證（犀利回饋） |
list_saved_references |
檢視文獻 |
save_reference_mcp |
儲存文獻（永遠優先） |
sync_references |
同步 wikilinks → References |
mcp_cgu_deep_think |
CGU 深度分析弱點 |
完整流程
Phase 1: 文獻搜尋
unified_search() → fetch_article_details() → 分析 Research Gap
Phase 2: 專案建立
project_action(action="create") → save_reference_mcp(pmid)
Phase 3: 概念撰寫
用 concept.md template 撰寫：Research Question, 🔒 NOVELTY STATEMENT, Methods Overview, 🔒 KEY SELLING POINTS
Phase 4: 驗證與迭代
validate_concept() → 犀利回饋 → 三選項（直接寫/修正/用 CGU）
🔒 Protected Content
| 標記 | 規則 |
|---|---|
| 🔒 NOVELTY STATEMENT | 不可刪除或弱化。Introduction 必須呼應 |
| 🔒 KEY SELLING POINTS | 必須全部保留。Discussion 必須強調 |
Agent 修改前必須問用戶確認。
Novelty Score 低的處理（犀利回饋模式）
禁止：自動改 NOVELTY、反覆追分、討好式回饋
正確流程：
- 給犀利回饋（具體問題 + Reviewer 會問什麼 + 修復方案）
- 給三選項：✅ 直接寫 | 🔧 修正問題 | 🤖 用 CGU 想
犀利回饋模式
| Pattern | 問題 | Reviewer 問 | 修復 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 聲稱「首次」沒證據 | 沒文獻搜尋紀錄 | 搜尋策略是什麼？ | 加入 PubMed 搜尋紀錄 |
| 模糊量化 | 「更好」沒數字 | 好多少？顯著嗎？ | 改為具體數值/OR/CI |
| 引用沒說限制 | 有 ref 但沒指出 gap | 貢獻在哪？ | 加入 ref 的具體限制 |
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 120 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A a3b5dbab66f5
concept-development is a skill published in the GitHub repository u9401066/med-paper-assistant (12 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 1,296 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
citation-manager
Format and manage citations — APA, MLA, Chicago, IEEE, and Vancouver styles with BibTeX export.
manuscript-reframe
Reframe report-like academic drafts into paper-form scientific arguments while preserving or explicitly renegotiating author intent; requires an approved old-versus-proposed spine, evidence and argument baselines, analysis-role control, and post-edit drift review.
peer-review
Review another author's manuscript, paper, thesis chapter, proposal, or preprint as an external reviewer. Use when asked to evaluate novelty, significance, gap-contribution fit, claim-evidence adequacy, methods, evaluation, overclaim risks, structure, writing, required revisions, or recommendation without rewriting…
revision-escalation
A revision-control guide for writing, coding, manuscripts, rebuttals, and restructuring work. It says to stop applying local edits after the same problem remains unresolved through three attempts and check the underlying requirements or structure.
author
Scaffold a conforming AI-layer artifact — a rule, skill, hook, agent, or output style — that already passes the format checks, then verify it. Use when adding any new AI-layer artifact — a shared one under .agents/ or a Claude-only one under .claude/ — so it matches the existing shape instead of drifting.
verify
Fact-check claims encountered during reading — dates, names, events, citations. Use when encountering historical facts or disputed claims.