scientific-skills/Academic Writing/abstract-summarizer/SKILL.md
Transform lengthy academic papers into concise, structured 250-word abstracts.
npx skillsauth add aipoch/medical-research-skills abstract-summarizerInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
4 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
scripts/main.py.references/ for task-specific guidance.Python: 3.10+. Repository baseline for current packaged skills.pypdf2: unspecified. Declared in requirements.txt.requests: unspecified. Declared in requirements.txt.cd "20260318/scientific-skills/Academic Writing/abstract-summarizer"
python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
python scripts/main.py --help
Example run plan:
CONFIG block or documented parameters if the script uses fixed settings.python scripts/main.py with the validated inputs.See ## Workflow above for related details.
scripts/main.py.references/ contains supporting rules, prompts, or checklists.Use this command to verify that the packaged script entry point can be parsed before deeper execution.
python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
Use these concrete commands for validation. They are intentionally self-contained and avoid placeholder paths.
python -m py_compile scripts/main.py
python scripts/main.py --help
AI-powered academic summarization tool that condenses complex research papers into publication-ready structured abstracts while preserving scientific accuracy and key findings.
Key Capabilities:
Extract and condense key sections into standard format:
from scripts.summarizer import AbstractSummarizer
summarizer = AbstractSummarizer()
# Generate from PDF
abstract = summarizer.summarize(
source="paper.pdf",
format="structured", # structured, plain, or executive
word_limit=250,
discipline="biomedical" # affects terminology handling
)
print(abstract.text)
# Output: Background → Objective → Methods → Results → Conclusion
Output Structure:
**Background**: [Context and problem statement]
**Objective**: [Research goal and hypotheses]
**Methods**: [Study design, sample, key methods]
**Results**: [Primary findings with statistics]
**Conclusion**: [Implications and significance]
---
Word count: 247/250
Ensure numbers and statistics are accurately retained:
# Extract and verify quantitative results
quant_results = summarizer.extract_quantitative(
text=paper_content,
priority="high" # keep all numbers vs. representative samples
)
# Validate against original
validation = summarizer.verify_accuracy(
abstract=abstract,
source=paper_content
)
Preserves:
Adjust extraction strategy by field:
# Biomedical paper
python scripts/main.py --input paper.pdf --field biomedical
# Physics paper
python scripts/main.py --input paper.pdf --field physics
# Social science paper
python scripts/main.py --input paper.pdf --field social-science
Field-Specific Handling: | Field | Focus Areas | Special Handling | |-------|-------------|------------------| | Biomedical | Study design, statistical significance, clinical relevance | Preserve P-values, effect sizes | | Physics | Theoretical framework, experimental setup, precision | Keep measurement uncertainties | | CS/Engineering | Algorithm performance, benchmarks, complexity | Retain accuracy percentages | | Social Science | Methodology, sample demographics, theoretical contribution | Preserve effect descriptions |
Summarize multiple papers for systematic reviews:
from scripts.batch import BatchProcessor
batch = BatchProcessor()
# Process directory of papers
summaries = batch.summarize_directory(
directory="literature_review/",
output_format="csv", # or json, markdown
include_metadata=True # title, authors, year
)
# Generate review matrix
matrix = batch.create_summary_matrix(summaries)
matrix.save("review_matrix.csv")
Output:
Pre-Summarization:
During Summarization:
Post-Summarization:
Before Use:
Accuracy Issues:
❌ Misrepresenting statistics → "Significant improvement" when p>0.05
❌ Oversimplifying complex findings → "Drug works" vs nuanced efficacy data
❌ Missing adverse events → Only reporting positive results
Structure Issues:
❌ Methods too detailed → Protocol steps in abstract
❌ Results without context → Numbers without interpretation
❌ Conclusion overstates → "Cure for cancer" from preclinical data
Word Count Issues:
❌ Exceeding 250 words → Journal rejection
❌ Too short (<150 words) → Missing key information
Available in references/ directory:
abstract_templates.md - Discipline-specific abstract formatsquantitative_checklist.md - Number verification guidelinesdisciplinary_guidelines.md - Field-specific conventionsjournal_requirements.md - Word limits by publisherexample_abstracts.md - High-quality examples by typeLocated in scripts/ directory:
main.py - CLI interface for summarizationsummarizer.py - Core abstract generation engineextractor.py - PDF and text extractionvalidator.py - Accuracy checking and verificationbatch_processor.py - Multi-document processingadapter.py - Journal-specific formatting📝 Note: This tool generates draft abstracts for efficiency, but all summaries require human review before submission. Always verify that numbers, statistics, and conclusions accurately reflect the original paper.
| Parameter | Type | Default | Description |
|-----------|------|---------|-------------|
| --input | str | Required | |
| --text | str | Required | Direct text input |
| --url | str | Required | URL to fetch paper from |
| --output | str | Required | Output file path |
| --format | str | 'structured' | Output format |
Every final response should make these items explicit when they are relevant:
scripts/main.py fails, report the failure point, summarize what still can be completed safely, and provide a manual fallback.This skill accepts requests that match the documented purpose of abstract-summarizer and include enough context to complete the workflow safely.
Do not continue the workflow when the request is out of scope, missing a critical input, or would require unsupported assumptions. Instead respond:
abstract-summarizeronly handles its documented workflow. Please provide the missing required inputs or switch to a more suitable skill.
Use the following fixed structure for non-trivial requests:
If the request is simple, you may compress the structure, but still keep assumptions and limits explicit when they affect correctness.
tools
Generates complete conventional oncology bulk-transcriptome biomarker and hub-gene research designs from a user-provided cancer type and study direction. Always use this skill whenever a user wants to design, plan, or build a tumor bioinformatics study centered on differential expression, prognostic filtering or risk modeling, PPI-based hub-gene prioritization, diagnostic/prognostic evaluation, clinical association, immune infiltration context, methylation context, and optional tissue or cell validation. Covers five study patterns (signature-first prognostic workflow, hub-gene-first biomarker workflow, hybrid signature-to-hub workflow, immune-context biomarker workflow, translational validation workflow) and always outputs four workload configs (Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+) with recommended primary plan, step-by-step workflow, figure plan, validation strategy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path...
development
Generates complete conventional non-oncology bioinformatics research designs from a user-provided disease context, process-related gene family or biological theme, and validation direction. Use when a study centers on multi-dataset bulk transcriptome integration, DEG analysis, process-gene intersection, enrichment analysis, GSEA, PPI hub-gene prioritization, TF/miRNA regulatory networks, ROC-based biomarker evaluation, and immune infiltration analysis. Covers five study patterns (process-DEG discovery, enrichment/GSEA interpretation, hub-gene prioritization, regulatory-network and immune interpretation, multi-layer public validation) and always outputs Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+ with a recommended primary plan, stepwise workflow, figure plan, validation hierarchy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path, and strictly verified literature retrieval.
tools
Plans confounder control, variable adjustment logic, and bias mitigation strategies at the protocol stage for clinical, epidemiologic, translational, observational, and biomarker studies. Always use this skill when a user needs to identify major confounders, decide which variables should or should not be adjusted for, compare matching/stratification/weighting approaches, anticipate selection or measurement bias, or pressure-test a study design before execution. Focus on bias sensing, causal structure awareness, variable-role classification, and critical design review rather than generic statistical advice.
testing
Generates complete comparative network-toxicology research designs from a user-provided exposure pair, shared toxic phenotype, and validation direction. Use when a study centers on two related exposures under one outcome and needs target collection, shared-vs-specific target decomposition, enrichment, PPI hub prioritization, docking, optional transcriptomic cross-checks, and conservative mechanistic synthesis. Covers five study patterns and always outputs Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+ with a recommended primary plan, stepwise workflow, figure plan, validation hierarchy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path, and strictly verified literature retrieval.