论文写作
- 作者仓库星标 0
- 作者更新于 实时读取
- 作者仓库 skills-registry
- 领域
- 写作
- 兼容 Agent
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- 信任分
- 88 / 100 · 社区维护
- 作者 / 版本 / 许可
- @tomevault-io · 未声明 license
- Token 消耗评级
- 低消耗
- 接入复杂程度
- 即装即用
- 是否需要外部 API Key
- 不需要
- 兼容的系统
- 未声明(默认跨平台)
- 底层运行要求
- 无特殊要求
- 文件与系统权限
-
- 只读
- 允许写入 / 修改
- 网络行为
- 允许外网请求
- 安装命令数
- 26 条
档案由构建时根据 SKILL.md 与安装命令自动衍生,可能与作者实际意图存在差异。
需要注意: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: get-research-paper
description: Discovers, retrieves, ranks, and summarizes real existing research papers on any topic. Searches…
category: 写作
runtime: 无特殊运行时
---
# get-research-paper 输出预览
## PART A: 任务判断
- 适用问题:文章、文案、发言稿、润色或结构化表达。
- 输入要求:目标材料、限制条件、期望输出和验收方式。
- 证据边界:围绕“1. When to activate / Slash commands / Natural-language patterns”读取原文规则,不把推断写成作者承诺。
## PART B: 执行结果
- **01** 任务判断:确认你的需求是否属于文章、文案、发言稿、润色或结构化表达,并标出输入、限制和预期结果。
- **02** 执行计划:优先按“1. When to activate / Slash commands / Natural-language patterns”拆成步骤,说明每一步会读取什么、修改什么、产出什么。
- **03** 交付结果:给出可复制的命令、文件改动、检查清单或内容草稿,并说明如何继续迭代。
- **04** 风险边界:结合 读取文件、写入/修改文件、会按任务需要访问外部网络、通常不需要额外 API Key 给出执行前确认项。
## Running Rules
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件;会按任务需要访问外部网络;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先小样例验证,再放大到真实任务。
- 交付时同时给结果、检查口径和下一步迭代建议。 原文出现了 `/get-research-paper`、`/find-paper`、`/find-papers`、`/fetch-paper`、`/papers-on` 这类斜杠命令;如果你的 Agent 支持命令触发,优先用命令开场,再补充目标和边界。
告诉 Agent 目标文件或材料、期望结果、不可改范围、是否允许联网或执行命令。本 Skill 的权限画像是:读取文件、写入/修改文件。
先用一个小任务确认它会围绕“1. When to activate / Slash commands / Natural-language patterns”工作;涉及文件或命令时,先看 diff、日志、预览或测试结果。
检查最终产物是否包含明确结果、必要证据和下一步动作;如果输出泛泛而谈,就补充输入、边界和验收标准后重跑。
---
name: get-research-paper
description: Discovers, retrieves, ranks, and summarizes real existing research papers on any topic. Searches…
category: 写作
source: tomevault-io/skills-registry
---
# get-research-paper
## 什么时候使用
- 用于提炼长内容、变更或对话里的关键信息 适合处理文章、文案、润色、翻译、总结和结构化表达,核心价值是把输入、判断、执行、验证和交付边界固定下来,避免 Agent 泛泛回答。 把任务拆成可执行、可检查、可继续迭代的步骤;通常不需要额外 A…
- 面向文章、文案、发言稿、润色或结构化表达,优先处理能明确输入、步骤和验收标准的工作。
## 需要提供什么
- 目标材料、目录范围、期望结果和不可改动内容。
- 是否允许联网、执行命令、读写文件或调用外部服务。
## 执行规则
- 围绕「1. When to activate / Slash commands / Natural-language patterns」组织步骤,不把推断写成作者事实。
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件;会按任务需要访问外部网络;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先跑小样例,确认结果可检查后再扩大任务范围。
## 输出要求
- 给出最终产物、关键证据、验证方式和下一步动作。
- 信息不足时标记 unknown,不编造命令、平台或依赖。 作者原文负责流程事实;仓库文件负责来源和命令;流狐只补充适用场景、限制和质量判断。
skill "get-research-paper" {
输入层 -> 用户目标 + 目标文件 + 禁止范围 + 验收标准
上下文层 -> 1. When to activate / Slash commands / Natural-language patterns
规则层 -> SKILL.md 触发条件 / 执行顺序 / 输出格式
运行层 -> 无特殊运行时 | 读取文件、写入/修改文件 | 会按任务需要访问外部网络
安全层 -> 通常不需要额外 API Key + 小任务验证 + diff / 日志复核
输出层 -> 可复制结果 + 检查清单 + 下一步迭代
} Get Research Paper
A research-discovery skill. Where the research-paper skill writes
papers, this skill finds them. Give it a topic, get a ranked,
de-duplicated reading list of real existing papers with verified DOIs,
key findings, and ready-to-cite metadata.
This file is the entry point. Heavier guidance (per-source strategies, ranking criteria, summarization prompts) lives in topic folders and is loaded on demand.
1. When to activate
Slash commands
| Command | What it does |
|---|---|
/get-research-paper <topic> |
Curated reading list (default 10 papers) |
/find-paper <topic> |
Alias for /get-research-paper |
/find-papers <topic> |
Alias for /get-research-paper |
/fetch-paper <topic> |
Alias for /get-research-paper |
/papers-on <topic> |
Alias for /get-research-paper |
/scholar <topic> |
Quick scholarly summary (5 papers, 2-line summaries) |
Common options:
--n <N>— number of papers (default 10).--years <range>— e.g.2020-2024,last-5,since-2018.--source <src>—arxiv,scholar,pubmed,semantic-scholar,all(default).--depth <quick|standard|deep>— summary detail.--style <harvard|apa|ieee|...>— pre-format the bibliography.--audience <academic|technical|general>— adjust summary register.--handoff— emit abibliography.yamlready for theresearch-paperskill.
Natural-language patterns
- "get research paper on / about / for [topic]"
- "find research papers on [topic]"
- "find papers on / about [topic]"
- "what are the top papers on [topic]"
- "show me research on [topic]"
- "fetch papers about [topic]"
- "list papers on [topic]"
- "literature on [topic]" (shorter than
/literature-review) - "scholar [topic]"
Negative activation
Do NOT activate for:
- Requests to write a paper (route to
research-paper). - Requests to review or critique a draft (route to
research-paper). - Casual questions ("what is X?") that don't need scholarly sources.
- Pure code / API documentation lookup.
2. Output contract
Every run produces, at minimum:
- Reading list — N papers with:
- Title (full)
- Authors (first 3 + "et al." if more)
- Year
- Venue / journal / preprint server
- DOI / arXiv ID / URL
- 2–4 sentence summary (problem → method → finding → significance)
- Relevance score (1–5) and quality score (per
citation_enginerubric) - Cite key (lowercase author_year_word) ready for use
- Field briefing (optional, default ON for
--depth deep) — a 1-paragraph synthesis of where the field is and what the dominant approaches are. bibliography.yaml— canonical-format file ready to drop into theresearch-paperskill.Known-gaps.mdblock — every paper that couldn't be verified is surfaced with severity and recommended fix.
See templates/reading-list.md, templates/paper-summary.md,
templates/briefing.md.
3. Core principles
- Anchor to TODAY's date FIRST. Before any search, determine
today's actual date (via
date -u +%Y-%m-%d, runtime context, or asking the user). Never default to training-cutoff dates. Year ranges like--years last-3are computed from today. Full protocol:instructions/freshness.md. - Real papers only. Never invent papers, DOIs, authors, or
findings. Use only sources the model can verify (or honestly mark
[UNVERIFIED — offline]). - De-duplicate aggressively. Same DOI / arXiv ID / first-author + year + title prefix → one entry.
- Rank by relevance and quality. A bad paper that mentions the topic is less useful than a great paper that's two clicks adjacent.
- Cite-ready by default. Every entry has cite_key + DOI + ready-to-use formatted citation.
- Triangulation. For load-bearing claims, prefer ≥ 2 independent sources. Note when a finding rests on a single source.
- Honest about limits. Without web tools, the model relies on training-data knowledge — flag every entry accordingly.
- Hand off cleanly. Output is consumable by the
research-paperskill via--handoffmode.
4. Top-level workflow
intake → search-strategy → fan-out search → rank+dedupe →
verify → summarize → assemble briefing → output (+ optional handoff)
Each step has a dedicated playbook. Read the file for the step you're
on; persist the artifact; move on. Master pipeline:
workflows/search.md.
5. Source coverage
| Source | When to prefer | Tool |
|---|---|---|
| arXiv | CS, ML, AI, physics, math, quant-bio | toolchains/arxiv_search.py (works offline-only via API) |
| Google Scholar | Generic / cross-discipline broad surveys | WebSearch with site:scholar.google.com |
| Semantic Scholar | API-friendly, citation graph, summaries | WebFetch of api.semanticscholar.org |
| PubMed / PubMed Central | Biomedical, life sciences | WebFetch of eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov |
| DBLP | CS authors / venues / publication lists | WebFetch of dblp.org |
| ACM DL | HCI, systems, security, networks | WebSearch with site:dl.acm.org |
| IEEE Xplore | Engineering, signal, hardware | WebSearch with site:ieeexplore.ieee.org |
| OpenReview | NeurIPS, ICLR, ICML reviews + papers | WebFetch of openreview.net |
| Crossref | DOI verification + metadata fill-in | WebFetch of api.crossref.org |
| Retraction Watch | Retraction screening | WebFetch of retractionwatch.com / database |
Per-source strategy details: sources/.
6. Ranking and quality
Each candidate paper is scored on:
- Authority (0–4) — venue quality (peer-review rigor, impact).
- Methodological rigor (0–3) — replicability, sample size, sound stats.
- Recency / relevance (0–3) — fresh + topical, OR foundational + canonical.
- Total (0–10) — used to rank.
Default reading lists keep papers scoring ≥ 5. Higher floors raise
the bar (--quality-floor 7).
Full rubric: prompts/ranking.md (extends the
citation_engine/source-evaluation.md of the research-paper skill).
7. Handoff to research-paper
After producing a reading list:
/get-research-paper "graph neural networks for fraud detection" \
--n 25 --handoff --style ieee --years 2020-2024
Produces:
gnn-fraud-detection/
├── reading-list.md # human-readable curated list
├── bibliography.yaml # ← canonical file for research-paper skill
├── briefing.md # 1-paragraph synthesis
└── Known-gaps.md # any unverifiable items
The user then runs the writer skill with the produced bibliography:
/research "graph neural networks for fraud detection" \
--style ieee --bibliography ./gnn-fraud-detection/bibliography.yaml
The writer reads the curated bibliography directly — no re-search needed.
8. Failure handling
- No web search available → use model-known papers, mark every
entry
[UNVERIFIED — offline], lower the recommended--nto 5–8, and surface the limitation in the briefing. - Search returns nothing → broaden the query (drop adjectives, try synonyms), then return what was found with an honest note.
- Conflicting metadata across sources → prefer the published (peer-reviewed) version over the preprint; note the relationship.
- Retracted paper detected → drop from the list; flag in
Known-gaps.md. - Out-of-scope topic → surface a note in the briefing; deliver best-effort results.
9. Where to look next
- Plan a search →
workflows/search.md - Per-source strategy →
sources/ - Ranking rubric →
prompts/ranking.md - Summarization →
prompts/summarization.md - Output templates →
templates/ - Hand off to writer →
workflows/handoff-to-writer.md - arXiv search tool →
toolchains/arxiv_search.py
This skill is intentionally smaller than the writer skill. Its job is
discovery and curation; the heavy lifting (writing, methodology,
review) lives in research-paper.
Source: aniketkrs/research-paper — distributed by TomeVault.
先判断是否适合
作者设计意图
作者的方法与取舍
边界和复核