| name | ai-research-writing |
| description | Use when the user wants academic writing prompts, paper polishing workflows, translation/rewrite guidance, reviewer-style paper critique, experiment write-up help, title/caption drafting, or practical AI-assisted research writing support. This skill adapts the prompt library and usage guidance curated in the awesome-ai-research-writing repository into a MedrixFlow-compatible writing workflow. |
| author | Leey21-inspired MedrixFlow adaptation |
| version | 1.0.0 |
AI Research Writing
This skill adapts the practical academic-writing prompt collection from the
awesome-ai-research-writing repository into a MedrixFlow-compatible workflow.
Use it when the user asks for:
- Chinese-to-English or English-to-Chinese academic translation
- paper polishing or de-AI-ification
- logic checking for manuscript sections
- title or caption drafting
- reviewer-style critique of a paper draft
- experiment analysis write-up support
- research-writing prompt recommendations
Scope
This is a writing-support skill, not an execution-heavy tool skill.
It should help the agent:
- choose an appropriate writing mode
- structure the task before editing
- apply concise academic-writing constraints
- return polished output plus brief rationale when useful
Working Method
- Identify the writing intent first:
- translation
- polishing
- logic audit
- reviewer critique
- title/caption generation
- experiment analysis
- Preserve factual meaning. Do not invent claims, citations, results, or
novelty.
- If the user provides draft text, work directly on that text rather than
answering abstractly.
- If the user asks for publication-grade wording, prefer concise, natural,
reviewer-resistant academic prose over flashy wording.
- For full paper/manuscript generation, default to LaTeX source and PDF output.
Use exact BibTeX keys from
references.bib, call manuscript_export for
final delivery, and avoid \nocite{*} unless explicitly requested.
- If the user is writing in Chinese, you may explain decisions in Chinese, but
produce the requested target-language result exactly as asked.
Output Modes
1. Translation
- Keep technical meaning stable.
- Preserve formulas, symbols, and explicit numeric claims.
- Escape LaTeX-sensitive characters only when the user wants LaTeX-ready output.
2. Polishing
- Remove awkward AI-style phrasing.
- Prefer precise verbs, concrete logical connectors, and shorter sentences.
- Do not over-intensify novelty claims.
3. Logic Audit
- Flag missing assumptions, unsupported jumps, repeated points, and vague
conclusions.
- Prefer reviewer-style comments tied to the specific text.
4. Reviewer Critique
- Evaluate contribution clarity, methodological trust, evidence sufficiency,
limitation handling, and writing clarity.
- Separate major issues from minor issues when helpful.
5. Titles and Captions
- Optimize for specificity and information density.
- Avoid hype and vague adjectives.
Suggested Response Pattern
When editing concrete text, prefer:
- the revised output
- a short list of the main fixes if the user would benefit
When auditing text, prefer:
- key issues
- a revised version or repair strategy
References
The source repository also contains a broader prompt library and usage notes for
research writing. This adaptation is intentionally lightweight so the skill can
be loaded by MedrixFlow's native skill loader without requiring external
tooling.