Peer Review
spacering-net/codeg
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.
Structured peer-review of academic papers. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot.
Install Academic Paper Review
$ npx skills add HezaoHezao/poirot --skill academic-paper-review -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install HezaoHezao/poirot academic-paper-review --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/HezaoHezao/poirot.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review .claude/skills/academic-paper-review && 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 "academic-paper-review" agent skill from https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot/tree/master/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review into .claude/skills/academic-paper-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "academic-paper-review", 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/HezaoHezao/poirot/tree/master/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-reviewType 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 HezaoHezao/poirot --skill academic-paper-review -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install HezaoHezao/poirot academic-paper-review --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review .agents/skills/academic-paper-review && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "academic-paper-review" agent skill from https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot/tree/master/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review into .agents/skills/academic-paper-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "academic-paper-review", 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 HezaoHezao/poirot --skill academic-paper-review -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install HezaoHezao/poirot academic-paper-review --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review .cursor/skills/academic-paper-review && 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 "academic-paper-review" agent skill from https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot/tree/master/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review into .cursor/skills/academic-paper-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "academic-paper-review", 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/HezaoHezao/poirot.git --path poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review--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 HezaoHezao/poirot --skill academic-paper-review -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install HezaoHezao/poirot academic-paper-review --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review .gemini/skills/academic-paper-review && 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 "academic-paper-review" agent skill from https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot/tree/master/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review into .gemini/skills/academic-paper-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "academic-paper-review", 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 HezaoHezao/poirot academic-paper-reviewInstalls 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 HezaoHezao/poirot --skill academic-paper-review -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review .github/skills/academic-paper-review && 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 "academic-paper-review" agent skill from https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot/tree/master/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review into .github/skills/academic-paper-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "academic-paper-review", 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 HezaoHezao/poirot --skill academic-paper-review -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install HezaoHezao/poirot academic-paper-review --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review .opencode/skills/academic-paper-review && 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 "academic-paper-review" agent skill from https://github.com/HezaoHezao/poirot/tree/master/poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review into .opencode/skills/academic-paper-review/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "academic-paper-review", 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.
Facts
- Skill name
academic-paper-review- GitHub stars
- 249
- Token cost
- ~1.8k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 555 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 23
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
Structured peer-review of academic papers. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot.
- Works in 3 steps: Paper Comprehension → Critical Analysis → Review Synthesis
- Tasks that involve Peer review
- SKILL.md covers Overview, When to Use, Review Methodology and Review Principles, plus 4 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Academic Paper Review is an agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot. Structured peer-review of academic papers.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.8k 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 Peer review. The repository describes itself as: Poirot is a deep research agent kernel built for those who care about how agents are architected. The licence is MIT.
When your agent uses it
- Tasks that involve Peer review
Example prompts
- “/academic-paper-review”
Requirements
- Pre-approved tools (allowed-tools): browse_page, web_search, write_file, present_files
Workflow steps
3 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 86bf279. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves these tools, so the agent can use them without asking each time:
browse_pageweb_searchwrite_filepresent_files
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 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
Academic Paper Review loads about 1.8k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 16 tokens; SKILL.md has 555 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.
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 HezaoHezao/poirot at commit 86bf279, republished under its MIT licence (© HezaoHezao). 555 words, ~1,792 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/academic-paper-review/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- academic-paper-review
- description
- Structured peer-review of academic papers.
- allowed-tools
- browse_page, web_search, write_file, present_files
- enabled
- true
- related-skills
- arxiv, systematic-literature-review, deep-research
- license
- MIT
- author
- Adapted from deer-flow (Bytedance, MIT)
Academic Paper Review
Overview
Produces structured, peer-review-quality analyses of academic papers. Follows review standards used by top-tier venues (NeurIPS, ICML, ACL, Nature, IEEE) to provide rigorous, constructive, and balanced assessments.
Covers summary, strengths, weaknesses, methodology assessment, contribution evaluation, literature positioning, and actionable recommendations — all grounded in evidence from the paper itself.
When to Use
- User provides a paper URL (arXiv, DOI, conference proceedings)
- User asks to "review", "analyze", "critique", "assess", or "summarize" a research paper
- User wants to understand strengths and weaknesses of a study
- User requests a peer-review-style evaluation
Review Methodology
Phase 1: Paper Comprehension
Step 1.1: Identify Paper Metadata
Extract: Title, Authors, Venue/Status, Year, Domain, Paper Type (Empirical / Theoretical / Survey / Systems / Position).
Step 1.2: Deep Reading Pass
Read the paper systematically using browse_page:
- Abstract & Introduction — Identify claimed contributions and motivation
- Related Work — Note how authors position relative to prior art
- Methodology — Understand the proposed approach in detail
- Experiments / Results — Examine datasets, baselines, metrics, outcomes
- Discussion & Limitations — Note self-identified limitations
- Conclusion — Compare concluded claims against actual evidence
Step 1.3: Key Claims Extraction
List the paper's main claims explicitly:
Claim 1: [Specific claim]
Evidence: [What evidence supports this]
Strength: [Strong / Moderate / Weak]Phase 2: Critical Analysis
Step 2.1: Literature Context Search
Use web_search to understand the research landscape:
"[paper topic] state of the art [current year]"
"[key method name] comparison benchmark"
"[specific technique] limitations criticism"Use browse_page on key related papers or surveys.
Step 2.2: Methodology Assessment
| Criterion | Questions to Ask | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| Soundness | Is the approach technically correct? | 1-5 |
| Novelty | What is genuinely new vs incremental? | 1-5 |
| Reproducibility | Are details sufficient? Code/data available? | 1-5 |
| Experimental Design | Are baselines fair? Ablations adequate? | 1-5 |
| Statistical Rigor | Results significant? Error bars? Multiple runs? | 1-5 |
| Scalability | Does it scale? Computational costs discussed? | 1-5 |
Step 2.3: Contribution Significance
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| Landmark | Fundamentally changes the field |
| Significant | Strong contribution advancing state of the art |
| Moderate | Useful contribution with some limitations |
| Marginal | Minimal advance over existing work |
| Below threshold | Does not meet publication standards |
Phase 3: Review Synthesis
Produce the final review using this template:
# Paper Review: [Paper Title]
## Paper Metadata
- **Authors**: [Author list]
- **Venue**: [Publication venue or preprint server]
- **Year**: [Year]
- **Domain**: [Research field]
- **Paper Type**: [Empirical / Theoretical / Survey / Systems / Position]
## Executive Summary
[2-3 paragraph summary of core contribution, approach, and main findings.
State overall assessment upfront.]
## Summary of Contributions
1. [First claimed contribution]
2. [Second claimed contribution]
## Strengths
### S1: [Concise strength title]
[Detailed explanation with specific references to sections, figures, tables.]
### S2: [Concise strength title]
[...]
## Weaknesses
### W1: [Concise weakness title]
[Detailed explanation. Explain impact. Suggest how to address.]
### W2: [Concise weakness title]
[...]
## Methodology Assessment
| Criterion | Rating (1-5) | Assessment |
|-----------|:---:|------------|
| Soundness | X | [Brief justification] |
| Novelty | X | [Brief justification] |
| Reproducibility | X | [Brief justification] |
| Experimental Design | X | [Brief justification] |
| Statistical Rigor | X | [Brief justification] |
| Scalability | X | [Brief justification] |
## Questions for the Authors
1. [Specific question]
2. [Question about methodology choices]
## Literature Positioning
[How does this work relate to current state of the art? Key related works cited?]
## Recommendations
**Overall Assessment**: [Accept / Weak Accept / Borderline / Weak Reject / Reject]
**Confidence**: [High / Medium / Low]
**Contribution Level**: [Landmark / Significant / Moderate / Marginal / Below threshold]
### Actionable Suggestions for Improvement
1. [Specific, constructive suggestion]
2. [Specific, constructive suggestion]Show full SKILL.md (241 more words)Show less
Review Principles
- Always suggest how to fix it — Don't just point out problems; propose solutions
- Give credit where due — Acknowledge genuine contributions even in flawed papers
- Be specific — Reference exact sections, equations, figures, tables
- Separate minor from major — Distinguish fatal flaws from fixable issues
Objectivity Standards
- ❌ "This paper is poorly written" (vague, unhelpful)
- ✅ "Section 3.2 introduces notation X without formal definition, making the proof in Theorem 1 difficult to follow. Consider adding a notation table." (specific, actionable)
Adaptation by Paper Type
| Paper Type | Focus Areas |
|---|---|
| Empirical | Experimental design, baselines, statistical significance, ablations |
| Theoretical | Proof correctness, assumption reasonableness, tightness of bounds |
| Survey | Comprehensiveness, taxonomy quality, coverage of recent work |
| Systems | Architecture decisions, scalability evidence, real-world deployment |
| Position | Argument coherence, evidence for claims, impact potential |
Common Pitfalls
- ❌ Reviewing the paper you wish was written instead of the paper submitted
- ❌ Demanding additional experiments that are unreasonable in scope
- ❌ Penalizing the paper for not solving a different problem
- ❌ Being overly influenced by writing quality versus technical contribution
- ❌ Providing only a summary without critical analysis
Quality Checklist
- Paper read completely (not just abstract and introduction)
- All major claims identified and evaluated against evidence
- At least 3 strengths and 3 weaknesses with specific references
- Methodology assessment table complete with ratings and justifications
- Literature search conducted to contextualize the contribution
- Recommendations are actionable and constructive
- Review tone is professional and respectful
Output
- Output the complete review in Markdown
- Save to
.poirot/outputs/review-{paper-topic}.mdviawrite_file - Present to user via
present_files
© HezaoHezao, 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 poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review of HezaoHezao/poirot.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 86bf279
Compare with similar skills
Academic Paper Review 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Academic Paper Review this skillHezaoHezao/poirot | 249 | — | ~1.8k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Peer Reviewspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 17 repos | ~5.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Scholar Evaluationspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 11 repos | ~3.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Academic Paper Writing PipelineImbad0202/academic-research-skills | 51k | — | ~16k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Academic Paper ReviewerImbad0202/academic-research-skills | 51k | — | ~11k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Peer ReviewK-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer | 2.4k | 2 repos | ~3.1k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
Similar skills
Scholar Evaluation
spacering-net/codeg
Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and…
Academic Paper Writing Pipeline
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Runs a 12-agent pipeline that plans, drafts, cites, reviews and formats academic papers, with modes for revision, rebuttals, abstracts and citation checks.
Academic Paper Reviewer
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Simulates a journal peer review of a manuscript with a five-seat reviewer panel, an editorial synthesizer and several review modes.
Peer Review
K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer
Prepare evidence-bounded, constructive peer-review drafts and structured manuscript assessments.
Academic Research Pipeline
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Orchestrates a ten-stage academic workflow from research to finished manuscript, including integrity checks, two rounds of peer review and revision.
More from HezaoHezao/poirot
All 23 skills in this repoRequesting Code Review
HezaoHezao/poirot
Pre-commit review: security scan, quality gates, auto-fix. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot.
Blogwatcher
HezaoHezao/poirot
Monitor blogs and RSS/Atom feeds via blogwatcher-cli. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot.
Bootstrap
HezaoHezao/poirot
Onboarding conversation to generate a user profile. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot.
Chart Visualization
HezaoHezao/poirot
Generate charts: select type, extract data, render image. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot.
Code Documentation
HezaoHezao/poirot
Generate docs: README, API reference, architecture, guides. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot.
Codebase Inspection
HezaoHezao/poirot
Inspect codebases: LOC, languages, ratios via pygount. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot.
Related
Categories
Questions about Academic Paper Review
What does Academic Paper Review do?
Structured peer-review of academic papers. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot. Academic Paper Review is an agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot. Structured peer-review of academic papers.
When should I use Academic Paper Review?
Academic Paper Review fits situations like: tasks that involve Peer review.
How do I install Academic Paper Review in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add HezaoHezao/poirot --skill academic-paper-review -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review in HezaoHezao/poirot) into .claude/skills/academic-paper-review in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Academic Paper Review in Codex?
Run `npx skills add HezaoHezao/poirot --skill academic-paper-review -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (poirot/backend/agents/skill/builtin_skills/research/academic-paper-review in HezaoHezao/poirot) into .agents/skills/academic-paper-review in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Academic Paper Review 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 HezaoHezao/poirot --skill academic-paper-review -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/academic-paper-review, .gemini/skills/academic-paper-review, .github/skills/academic-paper-review and .opencode/skills/academic-paper-review in your project.
What does Academic Paper Review need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Academic Paper Review is instructions for the agent only. Its frontmatter pre-approves these tools: browse_page, web_search, write_file, present_files.
Does Academic Paper Review 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 Academic Paper Review 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 Academic Paper Review use?
Academic Paper Review is published under the MIT licence (declared in SKILL.md). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
How many tokens does Academic Paper Review use?
About 1.8k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 7.2k 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 Academic Paper Review?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Academic Paper Review: Peer Review (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), Scholar Evaluation (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), Academic Paper Writing Pipeline (Imbad0202/academic-research-skills, 51k stars) and Academic Paper Reviewer (Imbad0202/academic-research-skills, 51k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Academic Paper Review?
HezaoHezao (a GitHub user) maintains it in HezaoHezao/poirot, which has 249 GitHub stars. The repository holds 23 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on July 28, 2026.
Source: HezaoHezao/poirot on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.