| name | paper-review |
| description | Use for review-only requests for papers or books when the user did not explicitly ask for annotation. Handles the normal single-agent review flow. |
| user-invocable | true |
| disable-model-invocation | false |
Paper Review
Use this skill for the normal single-agent review flow.
Trigger rule
Use this skill when the user asks for a review-only pass such as:
- review this paper
- critique this paper
- hard review
- find issues in this paper
- review and add to Zotero
Do not use this skill when the user explicitly asks for both annotation and review.
Use annotated-review instead.
If the user explicitly asks for multiple agents, a panel, or a multi-agent review,
use agent_group_discuss instead.
Document lookup order for review tasks
Follow AGENTS.md as the source of truth. In short:
If the user did not already provide a source path, attached file, PDF, or source tree:
- check
zotero
- if not found there, check
calibre
- only if neither local library has the document, use an online path such as
getscipapers_requester
For review tasks, do not go online before checking both local libraries.
Document parsing preference
When you have the document as a local PDF, office file, HTML export, or image-backed scan, prefer docling for structure-aware parsing before relying on ad hoc plain-text extraction.
Use Docling especially when the review depends on:
- section hierarchy
- table extraction
- figure or picture detection
- reading order in complex layouts
- OCR on scanned pages
Review expectations
- Keep the review single-agent by default.
- Focus on correctness, argument quality, clarity, missing assumptions, and important edge cases.
- Use
references/common_issues.md and references/reporting_standards.md as internal checklists when useful.
- Summarize the main issues clearly, with evidence from the provided or retrieved document.
- Zotero writes are off by default unless the user explicitly asks for them.
Recommended output format
Summary
- paper title, authors, venue/year when available
- overall assessment
Issues
For each issue:
- Severity: critical / major / minor / suggestion
- Type: logic / math / consistency / notation / presentation / missing / unsupported
- Location: page, section, line, or paragraph reference
- Quote: short supporting quote when helpful
- Description: what fails and why
Strengths
- key contributions
- what works well
Recommended actions
- prioritized fixes, highest severity first
Routing boundary
- review-only -> this skill
- annotate + review ->
annotated-review
- multi-agent review ->
agent_group_discuss
