smithery/warrenzhu050413

Writing Papers

Create interactive HTML artifacts for academic papers using parallel subagent processing. Includes comprehensive pre-submission review checklist for paper quality assurance.

Installation

$ npx skills add smithery/warrenzhu050413 --skill writing-papers

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from smithery/warrenzhu050413 · top by installs.

npx skills add smithery/warrenzhu050413

Browse all from smithery/warrenzhu050413

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 5,638 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 195 B

History

  1. First recorded snapshot · 0 installs

SKILL.md

Writing Papers

Sources

Use parallel subagents to fetch:

  • ArXiv: Open-access papers (most common)
  • Anna's Archive: Download if not freely available
  • Exa Search (mcpexawebsearchexa): Fallback
  • Web search: General fallback

Subagent Processing

  • Launch one subagent per paper (or per major section for long papers)
  • Each agent extracts:

- Title, authors, publication info - Abstract and key findings - Methodology overview - Important figures/tables - Citations and references

Artifact Creation

Compose with artifacts-builder skill - don't duplicate instructions.

Include:

  • Paper summary (title, authors, abstract)
  • Key visualizations (figures, concept maps)
  • Navigation (collapsible sections, TOC)
  • Searchable content (full-text search)
  • Citations (properly formatted)
  • Responsive design (mobile/desktop)

Batch Organization

When handling multiple papers:

  • Group by week, topic, or theme
  • Create dashboard with links between papers
  • Highlight connections and cross-references
  • Show thematic patterns

Output: Single HTML artifact per paper, or combined dashboard for batches.


Pre-Submission Paper Review Checklist

Use this checklist when reviewing academic papers before submission. Prioritize citation accuracy and template compliance as they can cause desk rejection.

1. Style & Formatting Consistency

  • Template compliance: Verify required conference/journal template is used correctly
  • Consistent terminology: Key terms used consistently throughout
  • Voice consistency: Academic tone maintained; no unintended informal language
  • Section structure: Logical flow verified (Introduction → Related Work → Method → Results → Discussion → Conclusion)

2. Citation Accuracy & Appropriateness

Priority: CRITICAL - Most important for scholarly integrity

  • Quote verification: Every direct quote matches exact source wording
  • Source claims: Each citation says what the paper claims it says
  • Better citations: Search for more recent/authoritative sources where appropriate
  • Citation format: All in-text citations match bibliography entries

3. Figure & Table Completeness

  • All figures referenced: Verify all figures exist as files and are cited in text
  • Table accuracy: Data matches actual study/analysis
  • Alt text: Meaningful accessibility descriptions provided
  • Figure quality: High-resolution images, anonymized if needed

4. Method & Results Integrity

  • Participant count consistency: Numbers consistent throughout paper
  • Quotes attribution: All participant quotes traceable to transcripts
  • Method details complete: IRB approval mentioned if required
  • Results support claims: Each claim backed by specific evidence

5. Contribution Clarity

  • Abstract-body alignment: Abstract claims match what paper delivers
  • Research questions addressed: Each stated question/obstacle gets explicit solution
  • Novel contribution: Introduction distinguishes work from related work

6. Anonymization (if blind review)

Priority: CRITICAL - Can cause desk rejection

  • Author information removed: No self-identifying details (institutions, grants, locations)
  • Study location anonymized: Geographic references removed
  • Supplementary materials: External links to code/data are anonymized

7. Reference Completeness

  • All citations in bibliography: Every in-text citation has corresponding entry
  • Bibliography formatting: Required format followed (APA, ACM, IEEE, etc.)
  • DOIs included: Add DOI links where available for verification

8. Logical Coherence

  • Theory-to-design mapping: Theoretical foundation informs design decisions
  • Evaluation validates claims: Study findings support design implications
  • No contradictions: Introduction promises match Discussion delivery

9. Writing Quality

  • Proofread for typos: Spell-checker used; common errors reviewed
  • Sentence clarity: Overly long sentences (>40 words) broken up
  • Jargon defined: Technical terms defined on first use

10. Ethical & Inclusivity Check

  • Participant consent: IRB approval and informed consent obtained
  • Inclusive language: Gender-neutral pronouns; no assumptions about populations
  • Limitations acknowledged: Honest assessment of scope limits included
  • Data availability: Statement about repository access if applicable

Recommended Review Order

  1. Citation accuracy (Item 2) — Critical for scholarly integrity
  2. Anonymization (Item 6) — Can cause desk rejection
  3. Method integrity (Item 4) — Ensures reproducibility
  4. Figure/Table completeness (Item 3) — Avoids broken references
  5. All others — For polish and clarity

Citation Verification Process

For each citation:

  1. Locate source: Find original paper/book/website
  2. Verify quote accuracy: If quoting, check exact wording matches
  3. Verify claim accuracy: Confirm source says what you claim it says
  4. Check context: Ensure quote/claim not taken out of context
  5. Find better sources: Search for more recent or authoritative alternatives
  6. Document verification: Note which citations verified and when