Peer Review
spacering-net/codeg
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.
Structured framework for writing peer review reports and paper critiques
Install Paper Critique Framework
$ npx skills add wentorai/research-plugins --skill paper-critique-framework -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install wentorai/research-plugins paper-critique-framework --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/wentorai/research-plugins.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework .claude/skills/paper-critique-framework && 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 "paper-critique-framework" agent skill from https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins/tree/main/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework into .claude/skills/paper-critique-framework/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "paper-critique-framework", 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/wentorai/research-plugins/tree/main/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-frameworkType 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 wentorai/research-plugins --skill paper-critique-framework -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install wentorai/research-plugins paper-critique-framework --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework .agents/skills/paper-critique-framework && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "paper-critique-framework" agent skill from https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins/tree/main/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework into .agents/skills/paper-critique-framework/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "paper-critique-framework", 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 wentorai/research-plugins --skill paper-critique-framework -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install wentorai/research-plugins paper-critique-framework --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework .cursor/skills/paper-critique-framework && 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 "paper-critique-framework" agent skill from https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins/tree/main/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework into .cursor/skills/paper-critique-framework/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "paper-critique-framework", 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/wentorai/research-plugins.git --path skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework--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 wentorai/research-plugins --skill paper-critique-framework -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install wentorai/research-plugins paper-critique-framework --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework .gemini/skills/paper-critique-framework && 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 "paper-critique-framework" agent skill from https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins/tree/main/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework into .gemini/skills/paper-critique-framework/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "paper-critique-framework", 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 wentorai/research-plugins paper-critique-frameworkInstalls 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 wentorai/research-plugins --skill paper-critique-framework -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework .github/skills/paper-critique-framework && 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 "paper-critique-framework" agent skill from https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins/tree/main/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework into .github/skills/paper-critique-framework/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "paper-critique-framework", 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 wentorai/research-plugins --skill paper-critique-framework -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install wentorai/research-plugins paper-critique-framework --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework .opencode/skills/paper-critique-framework && 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 "paper-critique-framework" agent skill from https://github.com/wentorai/research-plugins/tree/main/skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework into .opencode/skills/paper-critique-framework/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "paper-critique-framework", 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
paper-critique-framework- GitHub stars
- 298
- Used in
- 1 other repo
- Token cost
- ~1.8k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 526 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 405
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
Structured framework for writing peer review reports and paper critiques
- Tasks that involve Peer review
- SKILL.md covers Overview, The Three-Pass Review Method, Review Report Structure and Assessment Criteria by Dimension, plus 4 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Paper Critique Framework is an agent skill from wentorai/research-plugins. Structured framework for writing peer review reports and paper critiques
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: 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 Peer review
Example prompts
- “/paper-critique-framework”
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 markdown).
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
Links to these hosts (documentation or services it may open):
neurips.ccaclrollingreview.org
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
Paper Critique Framework loads about 1.8k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 24 tokens; SKILL.md has 526 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 wentorai/research-plugins at commit bf44b3c, republished under its MIT licence (© wentorai). 526 words, ~1,806 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/paper-critique-framework/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- paper-critique-framework
- description
- Structured framework for writing peer review reports and paper critiques
Paper Critique and Peer Review Framework
Overview
Writing constructive peer reviews is a core academic skill. This framework provides a systematic approach to evaluating manuscripts — from initial read-through to the final referee report. It covers what reviewers should assess, how to structure feedback, and how to calibrate between different review outcomes (accept, revise, reject). Applicable to conference papers, journal articles, and internal lab reviews.
The Three-Pass Review Method
Pass 1: Orientation (15-20 minutes)
Read only these elements:
- Title, abstract, and keywords
- Introduction (first and last paragraphs)
- Section headings and figure captions
- Conclusion
After Pass 1, answer:
□ What is the main claim?
□ What type of contribution? (empirical, theoretical, system, survey)
□ Is it within the venue's scope?
□ Does the abstract accurately represent the content?
□ Initial impression: novel or incremental?Pass 2: Detailed Read (60-90 minutes)
Read the full paper. Annotate as you go:
Annotation symbols:
? = I don't understand this
! = This is interesting / strong point
X = I disagree / see a problem
→ = This needs more evidence or justification
≈ = This is similar to [existing work] — check noveltyFocus on:
- Claims vs. evidence: Is every major claim supported by data?
- Methodology: Are the methods appropriate for the research question?
- Experimental design: Are baselines fair? Are ablations sufficient?
- Figures and tables: Do they support the narrative? Are they readable?
- Writing quality: Is it clear, concise, and well-organized?
Pass 3: Verification (30-60 minutes)
For papers you're seriously evaluating:
- Check key references — do they say what the authors claim?
- Verify mathematical derivations (spot-check, not exhaustive)
- Examine statistical claims (p-values, confidence intervals, effect sizes)
- Check for cherry-picking in results (only best runs? selected metrics?)
- Look for missing baselines that should have been compared
Review Report Structure
## Summary (3-5 sentences)
[Describe what the paper does, the approach, and the main finding.
Demonstrate that you understood the paper.]
## Strengths (bulleted list)
- S1: [Specific strength with evidence from the paper]
- S2: [Another strength]
- S3: [Another strength]
## Weaknesses (bulleted list, ordered by severity)
- W1 (Major): [Specific weakness + why it matters + suggestion to fix]
- W2 (Major): [Another major weakness]
- W3 (Minor): [A less critical issue]
- W4 (Minor): [Another minor issue]
## Questions for Authors
- Q1: [Something you'd like clarified]
- Q2: [A concern that the authors might be able to address]
## Detailed Comments
[Page/line-specific comments, typos, suggestions]
## Overall Assessment
Recommendation: [Strong Accept / Accept / Weak Accept / Borderline /
Weak Reject / Reject / Strong Reject]
Confidence: [High / Medium / Low]Assessment Criteria by Dimension
| Dimension | Questions to Ask | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Novelty | Is the idea new? Is the contribution beyond incremental? | High |
| Significance | Would this matter to the community? Does it advance the field? | High |
| Soundness | Are the methods correct? Are conclusions supported? | High |
| Clarity | Is it well-written? Can it be understood and reproduced? | Medium |
| Completeness | Are related works covered? Are experiments thorough? | Medium |
| Reproducibility | Could someone replicate this? Code/data available? | Medium |
Calibration Guide
Strong Accept: Significant contribution, technically sound, well-written.
Would be a highlight of the venue.
Accept: Solid contribution with minor issues. Advances the field.
Worth publishing as-is or with minor revisions.
Weak Accept: Has merit but notable weaknesses. Contribution is real but modest.
Borderline for this venue; would be accepted at a less selective venue.
Borderline: Equal arguments for and against. Significant weaknesses offset
by some novelty. Depends on other reviews.
Weak Reject: Interesting direction but fundamental issues not addressed.
Major revisions needed that likely require a new submission cycle.
Reject: Significant problems in novelty, soundness, or relevance.
Not suitable for this venue even with revisions.
Strong Reject: Fundamental flaws. Clearly below threshold.Show full SKILL.md (240 more words)Show less
Common Review Pitfalls to Avoid
| Pitfall | Better Approach |
|---|---|
| "The writing needs improvement" (vague) | Give 2-3 specific examples with suggested fixes |
| Rejecting for not solving YOUR problem | Evaluate the paper on its own stated goals |
| Demanding impossible experiments | Suggest feasible improvements within scope |
| Ignoring supplementary material | Check appendix — authors may have addressed your concern |
| Being harsh without being constructive | Every weakness should include a suggestion for improvement |
| Reviewing too quickly | Block dedicated time; a rushed review harms both authors and science |
| Citing only your own work as "missing" | Only cite if genuinely relevant, not self-promotion |
Reviewing Different Paper Types
Empirical Papers
- Are datasets described completely? (Size, source, splits, preprocessing)
- Are baselines appropriate and fairly tuned?
- Statistical significance: error bars, multiple runs, significance tests
- Ablation studies: which components contribute to the gain?
Systems Papers
- Is the system actually built and evaluated (not just designed)?
- Performance at scale: latency, throughput, resource usage
- Comparison with existing systems (not just algorithms)
- Deployment experience or case studies
Survey/Position Papers
- Coverage: are major relevant works included?
- Taxonomy: is the organizational framework useful and complete?
- Analysis: does the survey add value beyond listing papers?
- Recency: are the most recent advances covered?
Ethics Considerations
During review, check:
□ Are human subjects involved? Was IRB/ethics approval obtained?
□ Are there potential harms from the technology described?
□ Is the data collection ethical? (Consent, privacy, bias)
□ Are dual-use concerns addressed? (Misuse potential)
□ Are limitations and societal implications discussed?References
- Smith, R. (2006). "Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals." Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 99(4), 178-182.
- NeurIPS Reviewer Guidelines
- ACL Reviewer Tutorial
- Cormode, G. (2009). "How NOT to review a paper." ACM SIGMOD Record, 37(4), 100-104.
© 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/paper-review/paper-critique-framework 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
Paper Critique Framework 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paper Critique Framework this skillwentorai/research-plugins | 298 | 1 repos | ~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 wentorai/research-plugins
All 405 skills in this repoAbstract Writing Guide
wentorai/research-plugins
Craft structured research abstracts that maximize clarity and journal acceptance
Academic Citation Manager
wentorai/research-plugins
Manage academic citations across BibTeX, APA, MLA, and Chicago formats
Academic Paper Summarizer
wentorai/research-plugins
Summarize academic papers with structured extraction of key elements
Academic Study Methods
wentorai/research-plugins
Evidence-based study techniques for academic learning and retention
Academic Tone Guide
wentorai/research-plugins
Adjust writing tone and register for academic audiences and venues
Academic Translation Guide
wentorai/research-plugins
Academic translation, post-editing, and Chinglish correction guide
Related
Categories
Questions about Paper Critique Framework
What does Paper Critique Framework do?
Structured framework for writing peer review reports and paper critiques. Paper Critique Framework is an agent skill from wentorai/research-plugins.
When should I use Paper Critique Framework?
Paper Critique Framework fits situations like: tasks that involve Peer review.
How do I install Paper Critique Framework in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add wentorai/research-plugins --skill paper-critique-framework -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework in wentorai/research-plugins) into .claude/skills/paper-critique-framework in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Paper Critique Framework in Codex?
Run `npx skills add wentorai/research-plugins --skill paper-critique-framework -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/research/paper-review/paper-critique-framework in wentorai/research-plugins) into .agents/skills/paper-critique-framework in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Paper Critique Framework 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 paper-critique-framework -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/paper-critique-framework, .gemini/skills/paper-critique-framework, .github/skills/paper-critique-framework and .opencode/skills/paper-critique-framework in your project.
What does Paper Critique Framework need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Paper Critique Framework is instructions for the agent only.
Does Paper Critique Framework access the network?
SKILL.md names 2 domains. As links in the text: neurips.cc and aclrollingreview.org. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Paper Critique Framework 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 Paper Critique Framework use?
Paper Critique Framework 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 Paper Critique Framework 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 Paper Critique Framework?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Paper Critique Framework: 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 Paper Critique Framework?
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.