53 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
53 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: literature-review
|
|
description: Use this when the task is to survey prior work, compare papers, synthesize a field, or build a reading list grounded in primary sources.
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Literature Review
|
|
|
|
## When To Use
|
|
|
|
Use this skill when the user wants:
|
|
- a research overview
|
|
- a paper shortlist
|
|
- a comparison of methods
|
|
- a synthesis of consensus and disagreement
|
|
- a source-backed brief on a topic
|
|
|
|
## Procedure
|
|
|
|
1. Search broadly first with `alpha_search`.
|
|
2. Pick the strongest candidates by direct relevance, recency, citations, and venue quality.
|
|
3. Inspect the top papers with `alpha_get_paper` before making concrete claims.
|
|
4. Use `alpha_ask_paper` for missing methodological or experimental details.
|
|
5. Build a compact evidence table:
|
|
- title
|
|
- year
|
|
- authors
|
|
- venue
|
|
- claim or contribution
|
|
- important caveats
|
|
6. Distinguish:
|
|
- what multiple sources agree on
|
|
- where methods or findings differ
|
|
- what remains unresolved
|
|
7. If the user wants a durable artifact, write a markdown brief to disk.
|
|
8. If you discover an important gotcha about a paper, save it with `alpha_annotate_paper`.
|
|
|
|
## Pitfalls
|
|
|
|
- Do not summarize a field from titles alone.
|
|
- Do not flatten disagreements into fake consensus.
|
|
- Do not treat recent preprints as established facts without saying so.
|
|
- Do not cite secondary commentary when a primary source is available.
|
|
|
|
## Output Shape
|
|
|
|
Prefer this structure:
|
|
- question
|
|
- strongest papers
|
|
- major findings
|
|
- disagreements or caveats
|
|
- open questions
|
|
- recommended next reading or experiments
|