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 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/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit/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/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit/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 | $0.00033 | $0.00487 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00244 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00097 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00049 |
Grade A, and why
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 4d 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 — 57 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/review — Manuscript Review
Modes
- external (default): review another author's work as submitted.
- own-work: review the user's own draft. The clean room is real, not declared: spawn ONE fresh-context subagent whose prompt contains only the manuscript text (and explicitly listed evidence files), and relay its findings. Never present a same-session read-through as a clean-room review — the drafting conversation is context contamination by definition.
Evidence boundary
Judge the manuscript as submitted. Do not use prior chat memory, unstated author intentions, or model background knowledge as evidence for or against a claim. If a claim cannot be assessed from the manuscript and its cited sources, say so — that is itself a finding.
Findings format
Every finding is anchored (section/paragraph or quoted span) and typed:
| # | Type | Anchor | Finding | Severity |
|---|
Types: claim-exceeds-evidence | gap-contribution-mismatch | method |
structure | clarity | citation. Split findings three ways: defects that
block the recommendation, improvements that would strengthen it, and
questions the author must answer. Consult references/argument-checklist.md
for the interrogation checklist and examiner-attack pre-mortem when the
review targets argument quality.
Recommendation vocabulary
Exactly one of: accept | minor_revision | major_revision |
reject_resubmit | reject | no_recommendation.
Stop conditions
Stop and report a blocker instead of continuing if asked to: fabricate reviewer consensus, citation support, or experimental findings; review text that is not available as submitted; or convert this review into a rewrite — /review never edits the manuscript.
Constraints
- Never rewrite or patch the manuscript; output findings only.
- No emoji. British English.
- Own-work mode without a subagent available: state plainly that the review is NOT clean-room and label the output accordingly.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 57 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 4dd076498203
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository yha9806/academic-writing-toolkit (37 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 487 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-06.
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…
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…
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…
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…
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.…
preregistration-guide
Write and complete preregistrations for research studies before data collection or analysis. Use this skill when preregistering a study, writing a registered report, or understanding open science practices. Trigger for: "preregister my study," "how to write a preregistration," "OSF preregistration," "AsPredicted,"…