skills/research-learning-knowledge/paper-workbench/SKILL.md
Researcher-profile-driven paper intake and literature workbench for academic workflows. Use this whenever the user wants to skim, deep-read, card, compare, synthesize, map research gaps, or build a literature review from papers, arXiv/AlphaXiv links, DOIs, PDFs, landing pages, or existing paper JSON / workbench artifacts. Normalize sources into `paper-record`, then route into scan, deep-read, card, synthesis, review, or compatibility modes (`json`, `interpret`, `xray`). Trigger even when the user only says things like “精读这篇”, “整合这几篇”, “找研究空白”, or “搭综述框架”.
npx skillsauth add bahayonghang/my-claude-code-settings paper-workbenchInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Unified entrypoint for paper intake, strategic reading, multi-paper synthesis, and review construction.
Keep paper-record as the normalization layer. Do not merge high-level
analysis back into the normalized record.
Use this skill when the job is to:
Do not use this skill when the primary job is to implement a paper. In that
case, route to paper2code.
paper-record — normalized single-paper factsresearcher-profile — user research anchorpaper-deep-read — single-paper strategic analysis artifactliterature-synthesis — cross-paper integration artifactreview-outline — literature-review planning artifactdoi.org/... URLspaper-record JSONresearcher-profile, paper-deep-read, literature-synthesis, or
review-outline JSON$ARGUMENTS, the latest user message, or a
pasted JSON artifact.scripts/normalize_paper.py first.researcher-profile or collect only the missing fields.scan
deep-read
card
interpret
xray
json
paper-recordsynthesis
review
jsonscansynthesissynthesis and mark any gap mapping as provisionalFor any paper-like input, run:
python "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/normalize_paper.py" \
--source "<paper-source>" \
--lang "<lang>" \
--fulltext "<auto|prefer|never>"
Use --save only when the user asked to persist the normalized JSON.
Before deep-read, card, synthesis, or review, prefer a
researcher-profile.
If missing, collect only these fields:
research_fieldcore_questionthesis (optional)target_tierstageIf the user clearly wants no back-and-forth, proceed with a generic profile-light analysis and explicitly mark that personalization is limited.
If the user wants persistence, create or update the profile with:
python "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/workbench_io.py" init-profile \
--path "<profile-path>" \
--research-field "<field>" \
--core-question "<question>" \
--thesis "<optional-thesis>" \
--target-tier "<target-tier>" \
--stage "<stage>"
When the user asks to save a deep read, synthesis, or review plan, write a JSON artifact plus an optional Markdown or Org sidecar:
python "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/workbench_io.py" save-artifact \
--workspace "<workspace-dir>" \
--artifact-type "<paper-deep-read|literature-synthesis|review-outline>" \
--title "<artifact-title>" \
--payload-file "<json-payload-file>" \
--profile-path "<optional-profile-path>" \
--source-record "<path-to-paper-record>" \
--sidecar-file "<optional-md-or-org>"
作者观点 from 系统分析[信息待核实]synthesis and review must integrate arguments across papers rather than
serially summarizing each paperreview paragraphs must use PEEL as a micro-argument structure, not a
citation listdeep-read:
references/routing.md — source classification and routing logicreferences/schema.md — canonical paper-record contractreferences/artifacts.md — researcher-profile and higher-level artifactsreferences/migration.md — compatibility and alias mappingreferences/modes/json.md — machine-readable output rulesreferences/modes/interpret.md — lightweight explanation pathreferences/modes/xray.md — compact critique pathreferences/modes/scan.md — single-paper quick triagereferences/modes/deep-read.md — full single-paper deconstructionreferences/modes/card.md — literature card onlyreferences/modes/synthesis.md — cross-paper integrationreferences/modes/review.md — literature-review planning and writingdevelopment
Turn vague or complex Codex tasks into strong `/goal` commands with outcome, verification, constraints, boundaries, iteration policy, completion evidence, and pause/block conditions. Use when the user asks for Codex goal instructions, Goal 指令, 目标指令, `/goal` prompts, 中文 Goal 模板, plan-to-goal interviews, success criteria, verification commands, or bounded agent work definitions.
tools
Write, debug, and validate ast-grep structural code search rules. Use this skill when the user needs syntax-aware code search, AST pattern matching, structural refactor discovery, language-construct queries, or searches that plain text tools like rg can miss, such as finding functions with particular descendants, calls inside specific contexts, missing error handling, React hook shapes, decorators, or other Tree-sitter-backed code structures.
development
Use when the user asks to ground an ambitious proposal, avoid over-grand designs, make a bold direction executable, pressure-test feasibility, prevent "too much vision and too little landing", or turn a strategy/refactor/product idea into the smallest verifiable first move with stop rules. Trigger for requests such as 落地, 先落地, 别太飘, 收一收, 可执行, 可验证, 止损, and for follow-ups after geju-style big-picture thinking. Do not trigger for ordinary code review or implementation unless the user explicitly asks to ground or shrink the plan first.
development
Use when the user explicitly asks to think bigger, open up the design space, challenge conservative design, avoid over-indexing on backward compatibility, escape local-detail fixation, or make a bold high-level product or architecture direction call. Use for strategic reframing, not for ordinary code review, PRD writing, implementation planning, or adversarial risk review.