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 yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit --skill peer-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/yha9806/academic-writing-toolkitWrote 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/yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit/peer-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit/peer-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit/peer-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/yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit/peer-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit/peer-review.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 | $0.00070 | $0.01059 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00035 | $0.00530 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00212 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00106 |
Grade A, and why
peer-review 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 11d 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 — 155 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/peer-review - External Manuscript Review
Purpose
Produce a reviewer-style assessment of another author's work. This skill judges the manuscript as submitted, not as the author wishes it to be.
Use /argument-governance first when the review needs a formal gap-contribution or claim-evidence map.
Codex-Only Baseline
Complete the review with Codex using the supplied manuscript, supplements, rubric, and source anchors. Do not require Gemini, gemini-agent, a second model, or a subagent. If another reviewer tool is available, record its output as optional advisory context only.
If /argument-governance is unavailable in the user's environment, manually extract the same spine in the review report: problem, gap, contribution, main claims, evidence, boundary language, and reviewer risks.
Enhanced Advisory Mode
If the user explicitly provides or enables an API-key-backed model review, use it only after Codex has made a first-pass review from the supplied materials.
Rules:
- keep API keys in environment variables, never in review files
- send only user-approved manuscript or supplement excerpts
- label the external result as
advisory_external_review - compare it against Codex's local findings
- include only grounded, source-checkable points in the final review
- do not treat the external model as a reviewer consensus, venue decision, or factual verifier
Core Rules
- Review only the manuscript and explicitly supplied supplementary materials.
- Do not use private project memory, prior chats, unstated author intent, or unpublished context as evidence.
- Separate reviewer judgment from factual verification.
- Do not rewrite the manuscript unless the user explicitly asks for revision suggestions.
- Attribute concerns to manuscript locations, sections, figures, tables, claims, or missing evidence.
- Be fair: identify strengths before high-level weaknesses, but do not soften required revisions.
- Do not infer venue-specific acceptance thresholds unless the venue or rubric is supplied.
- Do not treat an unavailable external review tool as a blocker.
What ships with it
2 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.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 155 lines · 70 tokens per session scan A 446f326610c9
peer-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit (38 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 70 tokens to every session and 1,059 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
academic-cv
Write academic CVs, cover letters, research statements, teaching philosophies, diversity statements, and prepare for academic job applications. Use this skill whenever you need to create or improve an academic CV, write a research statement, develop a teaching philosophy, prepare application materials for faculty…
conference-presentation
Design and write conference posters, oral presentations, slide decks, and conference abstracts. Use this skill whenever you need to create a research poster, prepare slides for an academic talk, design a conference presentation, write a conference abstract, or prepare for Q&A. Trigger for: "design my conference…
latex-writer
Write, structure, and compile LaTeX documents for academic purposes. Use this skill whenever the user needs to write a LaTeX document, choose the right document class or packages, format equations, manage bibliographies, create figures and tables in LaTeX, troubleshoot errors, or prepare a journal-ready manuscript.…
argumentation-engine
Build, analyse, strengthen, and evaluate academic arguments using formal argumentation frameworks. Use this skill whenever the user needs to construct a logical argument, write a critical analysis, respond to counterarguments, evaluate the strength of evidence, identify logical fallacies, or apply argumentation models…
figure-table-checker
Check, improve, and ensure compliance of figures and tables in academic papers. Use this skill whenever the user needs to verify figure or table formatting, choose error bar types, check colorblind accessibility, ensure APA or journal-specific compliance, create CONSORT or PRISMA flow diagrams, or fix common figure…
literature-review
Plan, structure, write, and improve academic literature reviews of all types — including narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and literature review chapters in dissertations. Use this skill whenever the user needs to write a literature review, synthesise multiple sources, structure a review chapter, understand…