academic-research-suite

ARS-Codex workflows for research, academic writing, manuscript review, research-to-paper pipelines, and experiment planning. Use when the user asks for deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, research question refinement, academic paper drafting, paper revision, citation or integrity checks, reviewer simulation, peer review, editorial decision letters, research-to-paper workflows, experiment execution planning, statistical interpretation, or human study protocol support. Korean triggers: 논문 심사, 논문 수정, 초록 작성, 체계적 문헌고찰, 연구부터 논문까지. Also use for Claude-style ARS command aliases such as /ars-plan, ars-plan, /ars-outline, /ars-abstract, /ars-lit-review, /ars-citation-check, /ars-disclosure, /ars-format-convert, /ars-3w, /ars-revision-coach, /ars-revision, /ars-reviewer, /ars-mark-read, /ars-unmark-read, /ars-cache-invalidate, /ars-rebuttal-audit, and /ars-full. This skill vendors ARS role prompts, references, templates, and shared handoff schemas under ars/.

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Failed to scan

The risk profile of this skill

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured, actionable router skill with clear sequencing and good progressive disclosure into the vendored ars/ tree. Its main weakness is verbosity from repeated boundary/consent restatements and oversized mapping-table cells that could be consolidated or externalized.

Suggestions

Consolidate the consent/fail-closed boundary statements that recur across 'Codex Runtime Mapping', 'Security Boundaries', and 'ARS v3.21.1 Contract-Honesty Boundaries' into a single shared reference, keeping only the routing-essential rule inline.

Move the very long runtime-mapping cells (e.g. the ARS_CROSS_MODEL and ARS_CROSS_MODEL_TRANSPORT rows) into a dedicated reference file under ars/ and link to it, so the inline table stays scannable.

Trim the Contract-Honesty Boundaries bullets to the distinct rules; several bullets restate the same 'advisory, never authoritative, requires explicit consent' theme and can be merged.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient domain-specific guidance that Claude would not already know, but it is noticeably heavy: the consent/fail-closed theme is restated across 'Codex Runtime Mapping', 'Security Boundaries', and the ~45-line 'ARS v3.21.1 Contract-Honesty Boundaries' section, and several mapping-table cells are multi-paragraph paragraphs that could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, executable routing — exact intent-to-file tables ('ars/deep-research/WORKFLOW.md'), alias routing, canonical agent filenames, and explicit path-resolution rules — with only minor gaps, fitting the 4 anchor for an instruction-only router skill.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The routing decision tree is clearly sequenced with explicit precedence ('Apply this override before the general paper/pipeline routing rule and before the Claude-Style Alias Router') and a numbered first-response sequence for the Socratic path; minor validation/checkpoint gaps remain, fitting the 4 anchor.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Acts as a well-signaled overview router with one-level-deep references into ars/ (WORKFLOW.md, agents/.md, shared/) plus explicit resolution rules; some boundary/mapping detail that could live in reference files is inlined, keeping it at 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

95%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, comprehensive description that clearly states what the skill does and when to use it, with rich multilingual and alias trigger coverage. It is slightly above the atomic-action specificity bar only in granularity, not in coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists many specific capabilities ('academic paper drafting, paper revision, citation or integrity checks, reviewer simulation, peer review, editorial decision letters, experiment execution planning, statistical interpretation'), but they are stated at workflow/domain granularity rather than the atomic action level of the 5 anchor ('extract text', 'fill forms'), so it sits at 4.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' ('ARS-Codex workflows for research, academic writing, manuscript review... vendors ARS role prompts, references, templates, and shared handoff schemas under ars/') and 'when' ('Use when the user asks for deep research, literature review...') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the 5 anchor.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Comprehensive natural-term coverage including synonyms, Korean triggers ('논문 심사', '체계적 문헌고찰'), and command aliases ('/ars-plan', 'ars-lit-review'), matching the 5 anchor's breadth of natural phrasings users would say.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche (academic research suite) with distinct triggers spanning English, Korean, and ars-* aliases, giving minimal conflict risk with other skills, matching the 5 anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Validation

81%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning
metadata_field	'metadata' should map string keys to string values	Warning
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 7 missing	Warning

	Total	13 / 16 Passed

Repository: Imbad0202/academic-research-skills-codex
Path: skills/academic-research-suite/SKILL.md
Commit: 925975e

Reviewed: 6 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.