skills/novelty-check/SKILL.md
Verify research idea novelty against recent literature. Use when user says "查新", "novelty check", "有没有人做过", "check novelty", or wants to verify a research idea is novel before implementing.
npx skillsauth add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep novelty-checkInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security scan pending...
This skill is queued for security scanning. Results will appear when the scan completes.
Check whether a proposed method/idea has already been done in the literature: $ARGUMENTS
gpt-5.6-sol — Model used via Codex MCP. Must be an OpenAI model (e.g., gpt-5.6-sol, o3, gpt-4o)Given a method description, systematically verify its novelty:
For EACH core claim, search using ALL available sources:
Web Search (via WebSearch):
Known paper databases: Check against:
Read abstracts: For each potentially overlapping paper, WebFetch its abstract and related work section
Call REVIEWER_MODEL via Codex MCP (mcp__codex__codex) with xhigh reasoning.
When the method description plus the Phase-B paper list is more than a short
note, avoid pasting it inline into the MCP prompt. Write a dossier file such as
NOVELTY_DOSSIER.md (or a project-local equivalent) containing the method
description, core claims, candidate papers, and the exact questions below, then
send only the file path:
mcp__codex__codex:
model: gpt-5.6-sol
config: {"model_reasoning_effort": "xhigh"}
prompt: |
Read the novelty dossier at <absolute path to NOVELTY_DOSSIER.md> and
follow all instructions in it.
Dossier contents should include:
Output a structured report:
## Novelty Check Report
### Proposed Method
[1-2 sentence description]
### Core Claims
1. [Claim 1] — Novelty: HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW — Closest: [paper]
2. [Claim 2] — Novelty: HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW — Closest: [paper]
...
### Closest Prior Work
| Paper | Year | Venue | Overlap | Key Difference |
|-------|------|-------|---------|----------------|
### Overall Novelty Assessment
- Score: X/10
- Recommendation: PROCEED / PROCEED WITH CAUTION / ABANDON
- Key differentiator: [what makes this unique, if anything]
- Risk: [what a reviewer would cite as prior work]
### Suggested Positioning
[How to frame the contribution to maximize novelty perception]
verify_papers.py (canonical name resolved per shared-references/integration-contract.md §2; 3-layer arXiv / CrossRef / Semantic Scholar fallback inside the helper itself). Policy D1 (primary + degraded-output fallback): if the helper is unresolved or its invocation fails, tag candidate entries [UNVERIFIED] and surface the uncertainty rather than dropping them. Never fabricate arXiv IDs, DOIs, or titles from memory. Full protocol in shared-references/citation-discipline.md § Pre-Search Verification Protocol.After each mcp__codex__codex or mcp__codex__codex-reply reviewer call, save the trace following shared-references/review-tracing.md (Policy C — forensic; never silently skip). Use save_trace.sh (resolved per the chain in shared-references/integration-contract.md §2) or write files directly to .aris/traces/<skill>/<date>_run<NN>/. Respect the --- trace: parameter (default: full).
development
Search GitHub Issues and Discussions for software errors, version compatibility problems, and exact error-string matches. Use for debugging and discovery only; results are not paper-citation evidence.
development
Search GitHub Issues and Discussions for software errors, version compatibility problems, and exact error-string matches. Use for debugging and discovery only; results are not paper-citation evidence.
testing
Run the Anti-Autoresearch integrity-forensics sweep (span-anchored evidence ledger → GPT auditors propose findings → deterministic rules-only adjudicator) against a paper via a SHA-pinned thin launcher — then convert the verdict into a typed policy gate (BLOCK/WARN/NO_NEW_BLOCKER) and an append-only obligations ledger. Use when user says "integrity forensics", "forensic audit this paper", "投稿前自查诚信", "审这篇论文的诚信", or says "anti-autoresearch" when the upstream repo's own skills are not installed. Also invoked by /paper-writing (submission self-forensics, default ON), /peer-review (forensic appendix), /resubmit-pipeline.
testing
Privileged applier that LANDS meta-optimize / corpus-audit patches the user approved — the ONLY skill permitted to mutate the skill corpus from a self-modification proposal, with cross-model jury and human approval at landing. Use when the user says "meta apply", "/meta-apply", "land the staged patches", "应用优化", after a /meta-optimize run.