Agent skill

Scoping Review Guide

by wentorai in wentorai/research-plugins

Scoping review methodology for broad evidence mapping. An agent skill from wentorai/research-plugins.

MITAuto-check passedResearch & Science

Install Scoping Review Guide

skills CLI
$ npx skills add wentorai/research-plugins --skill scoping-review-guide -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install wentorai/research-plugins scoping-review-guide --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/research/deep-research/scoping-review-guide .claude/skills/scoping-review-guide && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.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/

Facts

Skill name
scoping-review-guide
GitHub stars
298
Used in
1 other repo
Token cost
~2.2k tokens
SKILL.md length
661 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
405
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Scoping review methodology for broad evidence mapping. An agent skill from wentorai/research-plugins.

  • Works in 5 steps: Identifying the Research Question → Identifying Relevant Studies → Study Selection → …
  • Tasks that involve Literature review
  • SKILL.md covers Scoping Review vs. Systematic…, Arksey and O'Malley Framework…, Other Review Types and PRISMA-ScR Checklist (Key Items), plus 1 more section
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Scoping Review Guide is an agent skill from wentorai/research-plugins. Scoping review methodology for broad evidence mapping

Its SKILL.md is about 2.2k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.

It sits in Research & Science, covering Literature review. It works with Prisma. The repository describes itself as: 350+ academic research skills, MCP configs, and plugins for Research-Claw and AI agents. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • Tasks that involve Literature review

Example prompts

  • “/scoping-review-guide”

Requirements

  • Python 3

Workflow steps

5 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. Identifying the Research Question
  2. Identifying Relevant Studies
  3. Study Selection
  4. Charting the Data
  5. Collating, Summarizing, and Reporting Results

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit bf44b3c. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    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.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are python and markdown).

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Scoping Review Guide loads about 2.2k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 19 tokens; SKILL.md has 661 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~19
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~2.2k

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.

Safety

Auto-check passed

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); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from wentorai/research-plugins at commit bf44b3c, republished under its MIT licence (© wentorai). 661 words, ~2,165 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/scoping-review-guide/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
scoping-review-guide
description
Scoping review methodology for broad evidence mapping

Scoping Review Guide

Conduct scoping reviews to map the breadth and nature of research evidence on a topic, using the Arksey & O'Malley framework and JBI methodology with PRISMA-ScR reporting.

Scoping Review vs. Systematic Review

FeatureScoping ReviewSystematic Review
PurposeMap the evidence landscapeAnswer a specific clinical/research question
QuestionBroad, exploratoryFocused, narrow
Inclusion criteriaBroadly defined, may evolveStrictly predefined
Quality assessmentOptional (not always done)Required (risk of bias)
SynthesisDescriptive/thematic mappingQuantitative (meta-analysis) or narrative
Protocol registrationRecommended (OSF)Required (PROSPERO)
Reporting guidelinePRISMA-ScRPRISMA 2020
When to Choose a Scoping Review
  • To examine the extent, range, and nature of research activity on a topic
  • To determine whether a full systematic review is warranted
  • To identify key concepts, evidence gaps, and types of available evidence
  • To map the research landscape before designing a primary study
  • When the topic is too broad or heterogeneous for a systematic review

Arksey and O'Malley Framework (5 Stages)

Stage 1: Identifying the Research Question

Scoping review questions are broad and use the PCC framework:

Population:  Who is being studied?
Concept:     What is the key concept or phenomenon?
Context:     In what setting or discipline?

Example question:
"What is known about the use of AI tools in undergraduate
STEM education, including types of tools, pedagogical
approaches, and reported outcomes?"
Stage 2: Identifying Relevant Studies

Conduct a comprehensive search across multiple sources:

Search strategy development:
1. Identify key terms from the PCC framework
2. Develop synonyms and related terms for each concept
3. Combine using Boolean operators

Example search string (PubMed):
("artificial intelligence" OR "machine learning" OR "deep learning"
 OR "natural language processing" OR "chatbot" OR "intelligent tutoring")
AND
("undergraduate" OR "higher education" OR "university student"
 OR "college student")
AND
("STEM" OR "science education" OR "engineering education"
 OR "mathematics education" OR "computer science education")

Databases to search:
- Discipline-specific databases (ERIC, PubMed, IEEE Xplore, etc.)
- Multidisciplinary databases (Scopus, Web of Science)
- Grey literature sources (ProQuest Dissertations, conference proceedings)
- Reference lists of included studies
Stage 3: Study Selection

Develop and apply inclusion/exclusion criteria iteratively:

markdown
| Criterion | Inclusion | Exclusion |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|
| Population | Undergraduate STEM students | K-12, graduate, non-STEM |
| Concept | AI-based educational tools | Non-AI technology (e.g., basic LMS) |
| Context | Formal educational settings | Informal learning, self-study apps |
| Study type | Empirical research (any design) | Editorials, opinion pieces |
| Language | English, Chinese | Other languages |
| Date | 2015-2025 | Before 2015 |

Screening process:

  1. Import all records into a reference manager or screening tool (Rayyan, Covidence)
  2. Remove duplicates
  3. Title/abstract screening by two reviewers (independently recommended but not always required)
  4. Full-text screening with documented exclusion reasons
  5. Pilot screening on 50-100 records to calibrate inclusion criteria
Stage 4: Charting the Data

Create a data charting form to extract standardized information:

python
# Example: Data charting template as a structured dictionary
charting_template = {
    "study_id": "",           # Author, year
    "country": "",            # Country where study was conducted
    "study_design": "",       # RCT, quasi-experimental, case study, survey, etc.
    "sample_size": 0,
    "population": "",         # Student demographics
    "ai_tool_type": "",       # Chatbot, ITS, NLP-based, etc.
    "ai_tool_name": "",       # Specific tool name (e.g., ChatGPT, ALEKS)
    "subject_area": "",       # Physics, CS, Math, Biology, etc.
    "pedagogical_approach": "",  # Flipped classroom, adaptive learning, etc.
    "outcome_measures": [],   # Learning gains, engagement, satisfaction, etc.
    "key_findings": "",       # Brief summary of main results
    "limitations": ""         # Reported limitations
}
Stage 5: Collating, Summarizing, and Reporting Results

Present results using multiple formats:

Descriptive numerical summary:

  • Number of studies by year of publication
  • Geographic distribution
  • Study designs used
  • AI tool types
  • Outcome categories

Thematic analysis:

  • Group findings into themes
  • Identify patterns, trends, and gaps
  • Map the conceptual landscape
python
import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

# Example: Visualize publication trends
df = pd.read_csv("charted_data.csv")

# Publications by year
year_counts = df["year"].value_counts().sort_index()
fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(10, 5))
ax.bar(year_counts.index, year_counts.values, color="#0072B2")
ax.set_xlabel("Publication Year")
ax.set_ylabel("Number of Studies")
ax.set_title("Included Studies by Year")
plt.tight_layout()
plt.savefig("studies_by_year.pdf", dpi=300)

# Evidence map: cross-tabulation
evidence_map = pd.crosstab(df["ai_tool_type"], df["outcome_measures"])
print(evidence_map)

Other Review Types

Rapid Review

A streamlined systematic review with methodological shortcuts to produce evidence within a compressed timeline (typically 2-6 months):

ShortcutTrade-off
Limit to 2-3 databasesMay miss some studies
Single reviewer screeningRisk of selection bias
Simplified data extractionLess comprehensive data
No formal quality assessmentCannot assess evidence strength
Limit publication date rangeMay miss foundational studies
Umbrella Review (Review of Reviews)

A review of existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses on a topic:

  1. Search for systematic reviews (use review filter in PubMed)
  2. Assess methodological quality of reviews using AMSTAR 2
  3. Extract and compare pooled estimates across reviews
  4. Identify areas of agreement, disagreement, and gaps
Show full SKILL.md (246 more words)Show less
Narrative Review

A traditional literature review that is not systematic:

  • No pre-defined protocol or search strategy
  • Author-selected references
  • Subjective synthesis
  • Appropriate for educational overviews, opinion pieces, and introductory sections of papers
  • Not suitable for evidence-based decision-making

PRISMA-ScR Checklist (Key Items)

ItemDescription
TitleIdentify the report as a scoping review
ProtocolIndicate if a protocol was registered
ObjectivesState the research question using PCC
Eligibility criteriaDescribe inclusion/exclusion criteria
Information sourcesList all databases and other sources searched
Search strategyPresent full search strategy for at least one database
Selection of evidenceDescribe screening process
Data chartingDescribe data charting process and variables
ResultsPresent characteristics of included studies (tables, charts)
DiscussionSummarize main findings, compare to existing knowledge
LimitationsDiscuss limitations of the evidence and of the review process

Practical Tips

  1. Use a reference manager from the start: Import all search results into Zotero or EndNote to track deduplication and screening decisions.
  2. Iterate on inclusion criteria: Unlike systematic reviews, scoping review criteria can be refined post hoc as you become more familiar with the literature. Document all changes.
  3. Create visual evidence maps: Tables and figures (bubble charts, Sankey diagrams) are more effective than narrative descriptions for communicating the landscape.
  4. Consider stakeholder engagement: Arksey and O'Malley recommend an optional Stage 6: consultation with practitioners, policymakers, or patients to validate findings.
  5. Plan for scale: Scoping reviews often retrieve thousands of records. Budget time accordingly (expect 2-4 months for a well-done scoping review).

© wentorai, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in skills/research/deep-research/scoping-review-guide of wentorai/research-plugins.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit bf44b3c

Used in 1 other repository

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 wentorai/research-plugins, which our catalogue first saw on October 7, 2026.

Compare with similar skills

Scoping Review Guide 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.

Scoping Review Guide compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Scoping Review Guide this skillwentorai/research-plugins2981 repos~2.2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Lit Searchluwill/research-skills860—~3.7kAutomated safety check: NotesMIT
Ma Search Bibliographyhtlin222/meta-pipe139—~2.1kAutomated safety check: NotesCustom licence
Systematic Reviewaiming-lab/AutoResearchClaw15k—~246Automated safety check: PassMIT
Meta AnalysisAperivue/medsci-skills333—~8.7kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Literature Review Toolsbrycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.6k—~2.5kAutomated safety check: NotesCustom licence

Similar skills

  • Lit Search

    luwill/research-skills

    Runs an exhaustive time-windowed literature search over a research topic and delivers a quality-tiered DOI list plus a matching formatted reference list, with measurable recall (gold-set recall…

    860 GitHub stars~3.7k tokensUpdated today
    Research & ScienceAuto-check: notes
  • Ma Search Bibliography

    htlin222/meta-pipe

    Conduct literature searches for meta-analysis using Python with uv, query PubMed and other databases, deduplicate results, and store round-based bibliographies with notes.

    139 GitHub stars~2.1k tokensUpdated 17 days ago
    Research & ScienceAuto-check: notes
  • Systematic Review

    aiming-lab/AutoResearchClaw

    Structured methodology for comprehensive literature review following PRISMA guidelines.

    15k GitHub stars~246 tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed
  • Meta Analysis

    Aperivue/medsci-skills

    A skill your agent uses when running a systematic review and meta-analysis, DTA or intervention.

    333 GitHub stars~8.7k tokensUpdated 5 days ago
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed
  • Literature Review Tools

    brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills

    Recommend AND run open-source AI tools, agents, Claude Code / Codex skills, and MCP servers for any stage of a literature review — searching, reading, extracting, synthesizing, screening…

    4.6k GitHub stars~2.5k tokensUpdated 5 days ago
    Research & ScienceAuto-check: notes
  • Review Paper

    Aperivue/medsci-skills

    A skill your agent uses when writing a literature review article (narrative, scoping PRISMA-ScR or systematic).

    333 GitHub stars~1.3k tokensUpdated 5 days ago
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed

More from wentorai/research-plugins

All 405 skills in this repo
  • Abstract Writing Guide

    wentorai/research-plugins

    Craft structured research abstracts that maximize clarity and journal acceptance

    298 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~1.7k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Academic Citation Manager

    wentorai/research-plugins

    Manage academic citations across BibTeX, APA, MLA, and Chicago formats

    298 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~2.7k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Academic Paper Summarizer

    wentorai/research-plugins

    Summarize academic papers with structured extraction of key elements

    298 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~1.4k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Academic Study Methods

    wentorai/research-plugins

    Evidence-based study techniques for academic learning and retention

    298 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~1.8k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Academic Tone Guide

    wentorai/research-plugins

    Adjust writing tone and register for academic audiences and venues

    298 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~1.9k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Academic Translation Guide

    wentorai/research-plugins

    Academic translation, post-editing, and Chinglish correction guide

    298 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~1.6k tokens
    Auto-check passed

Works with

Questions about Scoping Review Guide

What does Scoping Review Guide do?

Scoping review methodology for broad evidence mapping. An agent skill from wentorai/research-plugins. Scoping Review Guide is an agent skill from wentorai/research-plugins.

When should I use Scoping Review Guide?

Scoping Review Guide fits situations like: tasks that involve Literature review.

How do I install Scoping Review Guide in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add wentorai/research-plugins --skill scoping-review-guide -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/research/deep-research/scoping-review-guide in wentorai/research-plugins) into .claude/skills/scoping-review-guide in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Scoping Review Guide in Codex?

Run `npx skills add wentorai/research-plugins --skill scoping-review-guide -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/research/deep-research/scoping-review-guide in wentorai/research-plugins) into .agents/skills/scoping-review-guide in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Scoping Review Guide in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add wentorai/research-plugins --skill scoping-review-guide -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/scoping-review-guide, .gemini/skills/scoping-review-guide, .github/skills/scoping-review-guide and .opencode/skills/scoping-review-guide in your project.

What does Scoping Review Guide need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Scoping Review Guide is instructions for the agent only. Our summary lists: Python 3.

Does Scoping Review Guide access the network?

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.

Is Scoping Review Guide safe to install?

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. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Scoping Review Guide use?

Scoping Review Guide is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Scoping Review Guide use?

About 2.2k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 8.7k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Scoping Review Guide?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Scoping Review Guide: Lit Search (luwill/research-skills, 860 stars), Ma Search Bibliography (htlin222/meta-pipe, 139 stars), Systematic Review (aiming-lab/AutoResearchClaw, 15k stars) and Meta Analysis (Aperivue/medsci-skills, 333 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Scoping Review Guide?

wentorai (a GitHub user) maintains it in wentorai/research-plugins, which has 298 GitHub stars. The repository holds 405 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on June 19, 2026.

Source: wentorai/research-plugins on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.