paper-reading-quick-brief

name	paper-reading-quick-brief
description	Rapidly analyze an academic paper and output a structured quick-read brief for deep-read decisions. Use when users ask to review a full paper, summarize problem/method/findings, assess relevance to their own research, identify innovations and limitations, or recommend whether to read the paper in depth.

Goal

Read a full academic paper and produce a decision-oriented quick brief for research triage.

Workflow

1. Confirm required inputs before analysis.

• Require: full paper content (PDF/text/markdown/notes).
• Prefer: user's research direction, current topic, and what they care about most.
• If research direction is missing, ask for it in one short question.

2. Analyze paper in this order.

• Identify research problem and claimed gap.
• Extract core method (model, data, experiment setup, evaluation protocol).
• Extract key findings with evidence level (strong/moderate/weak).
• Identify novelty claims and practical/theoretical contribution.
• Identify limitations (data bias, external validity, missing baselines, weak ablation, reproducibility risks).

3. Assess relevance to user's research.

• Use high when problem, method, and evaluation setting all overlap with user's direction.
• Use medium when only partial overlap exists (for example same task but different data/method).
• Use low when overlap is mainly background-level or tool-level.

4. Produce output strictly in the report structure below.

Output Structure

Use these exact sections and headings:

1. ExecutiveSummary
   Use exactly 3 sentences: objective, method, main finding.

2. ResearchQuestion
   State the concrete scientific question and target objective.

3. Methodology
   List key methods/models/techniques as bullet points.

4. KeyFindings&Contributions
   Summarize major conclusions and academic contributions.

5. RelevancetoMyResearch

• Overall relevance: high / medium / low
• Detailed match/mismatch analysis with user's research direction.

6. Innovations&Limitations
   State major innovations and limitations/future improvements.

7. Recommendation
   Decide whether deep reading is recommended, explain why, and specify priority sections to read first (for example method, experiments, discussion, appendix).

Quality Bar

• Separate paper claims from your own inference.
• Avoid generic praise; be evidence-based and specific.
• Flag missing information explicitly instead of guessing.
• Keep concise but complete; optimize for fast go/no-go reading decisions.

References

• For a ready-to-fill scaffold, use references/report-template.md.