Literature Review
neflibata-feng/MyArxiv-Agent
Conduct comprehensive, systematic literature reviews using multiple academic databases (PubMed, arXiv, bioRxiv, Semantic Scholar, etc.).
A skill your agent uses when checking whether a manuscript's references are real.
$ npx skills add Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install Aperivue/medsci-skills verify-refs --agent claude-codeProject scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/verify-refs .claude/skills/verify-refs && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.
Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/
Install the "verify-refs" agent skill from https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills/tree/main/skills/verify-refs into .claude/skills/verify-refs/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "verify-refs", then confirm the skill loads.Claude Code copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$skill-installer install https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills/tree/main/skills/verify-refsType this inside Codex. $skill-installer <name> installs a curated skill from openai/skills. The installer writes to $CODEX_HOME/skills (default ~/.codex/skills). Restart Codex if the skill does not show up.
$ npx skills add Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install Aperivue/medsci-skills verify-refs --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/verify-refs .agents/skills/verify-refs && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "verify-refs" agent skill from https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills/tree/main/skills/verify-refs into .agents/skills/verify-refs/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "verify-refs", then confirm the skill loads.Codex copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install Aperivue/medsci-skills verify-refs --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/verify-refs .cursor/skills/verify-refs && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.cursor/skills/ instead of .cursor/skills for a personal install.
Cursor skills documentation · loads skills from .cursor/skills/, .agents/skills/, .claude/skills/, .codex/skills/
Install the "verify-refs" agent skill from https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills/tree/main/skills/verify-refs into .cursor/skills/verify-refs/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "verify-refs", then confirm the skill loads.Cursor copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gemini skills install https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills.git --path skills/verify-refs--scope user (default) or --scope workspace; --path is the subfolder of the repo that holds the skill; --consent skips the security confirmation prompt.
$ npx skills add Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install Aperivue/medsci-skills verify-refs --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/verify-refs .gemini/skills/verify-refs && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.gemini/skills/ instead of .gemini/skills for a personal install, then run /skills reload.
Gemini CLI skills documentation · loads skills from .gemini/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "verify-refs" agent skill from https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills/tree/main/skills/verify-refs into .gemini/skills/verify-refs/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "verify-refs", then confirm the skill loads.Gemini CLI copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gh skill install Aperivue/medsci-skills verify-refsInstalls for Copilot at project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Preview a skill first with gh skill preview. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ npx skills add Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/verify-refs .github/skills/verify-refs && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.copilot/skills/ instead of .github/skills for a personal install. Commit .github/skills so cloud agent and code review can use it.
GitHub Copilot skills documentation · loads skills from .github/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "verify-refs" agent skill from https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills/tree/main/skills/verify-refs into .github/skills/verify-refs/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "verify-refs", then confirm the skill loads.GitHub Copilot copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install Aperivue/medsci-skills verify-refs --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/verify-refs .opencode/skills/verify-refs && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.config/opencode/skills/ instead of .opencode/skills for a personal install.
OpenCode skills documentation · loads skills from .opencode/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "verify-refs" agent skill from https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills/tree/main/skills/verify-refs into .opencode/skills/verify-refs/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "verify-refs", then confirm the skill loads.OpenCode copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
verify-refsA skill your agent uses when checking whether a manuscript's references are real.
Verify Refs is an agent skill from Aperivue/medsci-skills. Use when checking whether a manuscript's references are real. Audits each citation against PubMed and CrossRef, flags fabricated or mismatched entries and writes qc/referenceaudit.json. Audit-only; never edits references or refs.bib. Citation-key checks are /manage-refs.
Its SKILL.md is about 3.1k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 39 other files, including scripts and reference files (for example `references/claim_evidence_workflow.md`, `references/manual_checkpoint_guide.md` and `scripts/_claim_evidence.py`).
It sits in Research & Science, covering Citation management and Academic paper search. It works with PubMed. The repository describes itself as: Agent Skills for medical research — literature search, reporting-guideline & citation checks, statistics, publication figures, submission. Works with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor &… The licence is MIT.
3 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 3b14ae2. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Ships 13 files in scripts/ (Python and Shell, from the files we listed), which the agent can run.
Shell commands in SKILL.md call:
python3pythonFrom the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Verify Refs loads about 3.1k tokens when it runs, and up to ~5.7k if it reads all its reference files. Until then it costs about 71 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,567 words of instructions outside code blocks.
Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.
The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.
Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); the scripts in this folder are not scanned.
The full file from Aperivue/medsci-skills at commit 3b14ae2, republished under its MIT licence (© Aperivue). 1,567 words, ~3,135 tokens.
.claude/skills/verify-refs/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 34 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.Audit an existing manuscript or bibliography for fabricated or mismatched references. This
skill never writes to references/ or manuscript/_src/refs.bib: corrections flow through
/lit-sync (Zotero → Better BibTeX → refs.bib), and /manage-project's
scripts/validate_project_contract.py flags any references/* file written here as drift. It
does not discover literature (/search-lit), and it never replaces a missing or bad citation
with a plausible alternative — replacements go through /search-lit or the user.
.md, .docx, .bib, .txt, or .tsv.--offline (extract and classify without API calls), --timeout N (HTTP
timeout seconds), --strict, --no-openalex.For markdown manuscripts with pandoc [@bibkey] citations, run a citation-key check first
(/manage-refs's check_citation_keys.py, or your reference manager's). It catches mis-keyed
cites; verify_refs.py catches fabricated metadata.
Run the bundled script rather than verifying citations by memory:
python "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/verify_refs.py" manuscript/manuscript.md --project-root .For hooks or quick manual runs, use the wrapper:
"${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/verify_cli.sh" manuscript/manuscript.md --offlineManual pre-submission strict run:
"${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/verify_cli.sh" manuscript/index.qmd --strict--strict forbids --offline and exits non-zero on any UNVERIFIED row. Read
references/manual_checkpoint_guide.md for when to run it and what to do per status.
Lookups run PubMed (PMID) → CrossRef (DOI; doi.org's handle registry when CrossRef answers
404) → OpenAlex, with a PubMed title search last. Every
OK row rests on DOI, PMID, CrossRef, or PubMed title evidence; a failed lookup is recorded as
UNVERIFIED, never silently passed. A title search, in either index, counts only when a returned
title matches the cited one (the same token-similarity guard), so a made-up title cannot earn OK
from a search that merely returned something.
OpenAlex tier. It recovers conference and non-DOI citations (NeurIPS / ICLR / ACL, common
in medical-AI manuscripts) that PubMed and CrossRef miss, and is called only when no author list
was obtained yet. It resolves by DOI, otherwise by a title search behind a token-similarity
guard so a fabricated title cannot earn OK. OpenAlex names have no family/given split, so they
support only an existence check and a tolerant first-author membership check — never the strict
positional or author-count MISMATCH, which stays with PubMed efetch / CrossRef. An OpenAlex miss
is UNVERIFIED, never FABRICATED. --no-openalex restricts verification to PubMed + CrossRef.
qc/reference_audit.json (schema_version 4) is the only output; this skill is its sole writer
and writes no TSV and no library.bib.
records[]: per reference, status, note, evidence, cited_authors[] /
actual_authors[], cited_author_count / actual_author_count. status is one of:OK: a lookup confirmed the work (DOI, PMID, or a title search passing the similarity
guard) and the authors agree.MISMATCH: the work exists but the citation is wrong: its authors differ (Gate 4), or its
DOI/PMID does not exist while a lookup still found the work (note = "wrong identifier…").FABRICATED: the cited identifier does not exist and nothing else found the work (details
below).UNVERIFIED: nothing confirmed or refuted it (a failed lookup, a DOI held only by another
registration agency that no index confirmed, no identifier and no title match, a PubMed
title-only match whose authors could not be compared or differ (note = "title_only: …"), or
--offline).counts and duplicate_findings[] (Gate 5).submission_safe: no FABRICATED, no MISMATCH, and duplicate_findings empty.
fully_verified additionally requires no UNVERIFIED.submission_safe tolerates UNVERIFIED rows because offline runs produce them; before a
submission, resolve each one (confirm it by hand and say how, or remove the citation) — do not
ship an UNVERIFIED reference as if it were checked.source_sha256 and audited_ref_ids: what was audited. A later reader compares them with the
current bib; a changed bib makes the audit stale.scripts/verify_refs.py.qc/reference_audit.json. Every verdict comes from it; never mark a row OK yourself.FABRICATED and MISMATCH rows first (from records[]).duplicate_findings[] entries (verbatim PMID/DOI duplicates — cite renumbering
required).UNVERIFIED rows remain, list them as manual checks and do not call the manuscript fully
submission-safe. Check note on every row, whatever its status: pagination_placeholder
(e000–e000 / in press / TBD / forthcoming) needs the citation resolved before
submission; /self-review Phase 2.5c decides whether any is a P0 blocker.records[] in chat — do not write a
TSV.FABRICATED.UNVERIFIED references.efetch.fcgi (XML) when a PMID is present — preferred because CrossRef is unreliable for
given names — with CrossRef and PubMed esummary as fallbacks. For BibTeX inputs every cited family name is
compared index-by-index, and the cited and source author counts are compared, after
normalizing case, diacritics, hyphen vs space, and name particles ("von", "van", "de"); one
name may be a whole word of the other ("Garcia" / "Garcia-Lopez"), never a mere substring
("Li" / "Williams"). A row
whose DOI/PMID resolves but whose authors differ at any index or in count becomes MISMATCH:
note = "first-author hallucination suspected" for the first author,
note = "non-first-author hallucination or count mismatch" for #2..#N or the count. A correct
first author does not establish the rest of the list. Plain-text / TSV inputs, and lists that
cannot be parsed confidently, degrade to the first-author check (skipped if even that is
empty). A PubMed title-only match is OK only when the matched record's esummary authors were
compared with the cited ones and agree; otherwise it stays UNVERIFIED. A declared
truncation — BibTeX and others, or a _audit_truncated = <N> field — turns a
shorter-than-source count into a note; citing more authors than the source is always flagged.duplicate_findings[]; submission_safe == true requires the list to be empty.e000–e000, in press, TBD, or
forthcoming is marked UNVERIFIED with note = "pagination_placeholder". verify-refs is
manuscript-agnostic and only flags; /self-review Phase 2.5c, with the manuscript in hand,
decides whether the citation is method- or headline-load-bearing and hence a P0 blocker.Citation-metadata confusion is not fabrication. DOI-suffix digits that look like, but differ
from, the article number (a DOI tail "77196" against article 26068) are cosmetic. When the
identifier resolves and the authors match, do not report the row as fabricated: the script
returns FABRICATED only for an identifier that does not exist — a PMID PubMed has no record of,
or a DOI that CrossRef answers 404 for and that doi.org's handle registry (which spans every
registration agency: CrossRef, DataCite, mEDRA, JaLC) reports as not found — and only when no
lookup found the work some other way. After a CrossRef 404 the DOI verdict is:
| doi.org handle registry | another lookup finds the work | status |
|---|---|---|
| not found | no | FABRICATED |
| not found | yes (a title search passing the similarity guard) | MISMATCH — a real paper cited with a wrong DOI |
| found (registered with another agency) | no / yes | UNVERIFIED / OK |
| lookup failed (network, 5xx, unexpected reply) | no / yes | UNVERIFIED / OK |
A DOI field that is not a well-formed DOI (a placeholder such as n/a) is not sent to doi.org and
stays UNVERIFIED, and so does a legacy SICI DOI (10.1002/(SICI)…) that doi.org does not find,
since its punctuation is easily cut in extraction. A real identifier with wrong authors is
MISMATCH (Gate 4).
verify_refs.py answers whether a reference is real and whose it is, not whether the sentence
citing it is true of it. scripts/check_claim_fidelity.py checks the claims that have a
checkable answer against full texts already downloaded and converted (/fulltext-retrieval
produces exactly that layout; this script never fetches anything):
python3 "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/check_claim_fidelity.py" \
--manuscript manuscript/manuscript.md \
--fulltext-dir fulltext/ --bib manuscript/_src/refs.bib \
--out qc/claim_fidelity.json --strict| Verdict | Severity | Fires when |
|---|---|---|
CITED_QUOTE_ABSENT | major | Quoted text attributed to a source is not in it in any reading order. |
CITED_QUOTE_UNRESOLVED | prompt | The quote matched with a word or two missing — the signature of a dirty extraction, not of a fabrication. Look; do not assume. |
ATTRIBUTION_UNSUPPORTED | prompt | Not one content word of the attributed claim appears in the source, in any form. Paraphrase normally keeps at least one of the source's own terms. |
ORDINAL_CLAIM_UNSUPPORTED | prompt | "reports three strategies [12]" where the source discusses that noun but never that count near it. |
Only the quote verdict can fail --strict; the others are prompts to go read the source,
because paraphrase is legitimate. Read the "not checked" lines: a citation with no full text on
disk is reported unresolved, and a source whose extracted text is an abstract is reported as too
short to judge. Silence means "nothing checkable was wrong", not "everything is right".
Known limits: a quote whose words all appear in order with source tokens between them
(INTERLEAVED) is treated as verified, so a quotation that drops a source word such as "not"
produces no finding; reread every quotation that changes a negation or qualifier.
qc/claim_fidelity.json also carries evidence_rows: one per recognized prose
sentence/citation pair, with manuscript coordinates, source-text and PDF hashes, advisory
retrieval identity, and an assessor-entered comparison that starts not_assessed even when the
bibliographic status is OK and no probe fires.
python3 "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/check_claim_fidelity.py" \
--manuscript manuscript/manuscript.md --bib manuscript/_src/refs.bib \
--fulltext-dir fulltext/ --retrieval-report pdfs/retrieval_report.json \
--reference-audit qc/reference_audit.json \
--out qc/claim_fidelity.json --evidence-table qc/claim_fidelity.mdEnter pages, excerpts, metric/unit/denominator, population, direction, and a named assessment
only after inspecting the actual source; equal numbers or matching words do not establish
support. Record whether the assessor used AI assistance, and never describe an AI-generated
assessment as human approval. Rerun with --reviewed-report qc/claim_fidelity.json to retain
annotations; changed inputs leave old assessments unresolved. The Markdown table is a derived
view, not a second editable evidence store. Read references/claim_evidence_workflow.md before
entering or carrying forward an assessment.
© Aperivue, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
SKILL.md and 34 other files (scripts, references) in skills/verify-refs of Aperivue/medsci-skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 3b14ae2
We found 1 copy of this SKILL.md (exact, near-identical or edited) in other folders, from 1 other GitHub owner. This page covers the copy in Aperivue/medsci-skills, which our catalogue first saw on October 7, 2026.
Verify Refs next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.
| Skill | Stars | Used in | Tokens | Auto-check | Licence | Repo updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Verify Refs this skillAperivue/medsci-skills | 329 | 1 repos | ~3.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Literature Reviewneflibata-feng/MyArxiv-Agent | 126 | 21 repos | ~5.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Citation ManagementK-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer | 2.4k | 3 repos | ~3.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Citation Managementneflibata-feng/MyArxiv-Agent | 126 | 20 repos | ~8.1k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Academic Search and Citation RouterYuan1z0825/nature-skills | 46k | — | ~884 | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| Nature Academic Searchjing1312/nature-figure-skill | 167 | — | ~1.3k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
neflibata-feng/MyArxiv-Agent
Conduct comprehensive, systematic literature reviews using multiple academic databases (PubMed, arXiv, bioRxiv, Semantic Scholar, etc.).
K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer
Finds papers in OpenAlex, PubMed and Google Scholar, turns DOIs, PMIDs and arXiv IDs into clean BibTeX, and validates citations for a manuscript or thesis.
neflibata-feng/MyArxiv-Agent
Comprehensive citation management for academic research. An agent skill from neflibata-feng/MyArxiv-Agent.
Yuan1z0825/nature-skills
Finds papers across literature sources, verifies and converts citations, builds MeSH strategies and audits independent citations of a paper.
jing1312/nature-figure-skill
Multi-source literature search, citation verification, MeSH search strategy, citation file management (.nbib/.ris/.bib conversion), and reference management (BibTeX, related articles, ID conversion)…
Liuxiangjian-ai/reference-checker-skill
Exhaustively verify English and Chinese manuscript references before journal submission.
Aperivue/medsci-skills
A skill your agent uses when validating or evaluating a trained medical-imaging model.
Aperivue/medsci-skills
A skill your agent uses when turning a folder of research PDFs into Obsidian notes, even if Obsidian is not named.
Aperivue/medsci-skills
A skill your agent uses when building or auditing a radiomics or tabular clinical-ML prediction model with a classical learner (LASSO, SVM, random forest, XGBoost and similar).
Aperivue/medsci-skills
A skill your agent uses when a clinical CSV/Excel dataset needs profiling and cleaning before analysis (missing values, outliers, duplicates, type mismatches).
Aperivue/medsci-skills
A skill your agent uses when checking a radiology or medical AI study design before drafting or submission.
Aperivue/medsci-skills
A skill your agent uses when each author needs an ICMJE Conflict of Interest disclosure form (coidisclosure.docx) for submission.
Works with
Categories
A skill your agent uses when checking whether a manuscript's references are real. Verify Refs is an agent skill from Aperivue/medsci-skills. Use when checking whether a manuscript's references are real.
Verify Refs fits situations like: checking whether a manuscripts references are real; tasks that involve Citation management; tasks that involve Academic paper search.
Run `npx skills add Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/verify-refs in Aperivue/medsci-skills) into .claude/skills/verify-refs in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
Run `npx skills add Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/verify-refs in Aperivue/medsci-skills) into .agents/skills/verify-refs in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/verify-refs, .gemini/skills/verify-refs, .github/skills/verify-refs and .opencode/skills/verify-refs in your project.
Going by SKILL.md and its folder, Verify Refs needs Python and a shell for the scripts in its folder and the command-line tools its instructions call (python3 and python). Our summary lists: Python 3; A Bash shell.
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. The check reads SKILL.md only: the scripts in the folder are not scanned, so read them before running anything.
Verify Refs is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
About 3.1k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 13k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full. Its references folder adds about 2.5k tokens, read only when the agent opens those files.
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Verify Refs: Literature Review (neflibata-feng/MyArxiv-Agent, 126 stars), Citation Management (K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer, 2.4k stars), Citation Management (neflibata-feng/MyArxiv-Agent, 126 stars) and Academic Search and Citation Router (Yuan1z0825/nature-skills, 46k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Aperivue (a GitHub organization) maintains it in Aperivue/medsci-skills, which has 329 GitHub stars. The repository holds 54 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 5, 2026.
Source: Aperivue/medsci-skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.