ask-paper

name	ask_paper
description	Answer questions about a paper in the vault, using note first and arXiv HTML as fallback

❓ Ask Paper Skill

Answer a question about a specific paper in the vault.

Input format: /ask_paper <partial paper title or keyword> | <question>

If no | separator is present, treat the entire argument as combined input and infer the paper title and question from context.

---

CRITICAL RULES

• Read the paper note first — always attempt to answer from the note
• Only fetch arXiv HTML if the note is insufficient — avoid unnecessary web requests
• Never hallucinate — if the answer isn't in the note or the paper, say so
• Single paper scope — answer questions about one paper at a time
• Project context allowed — may reference linked projects from the note to give research-relevant answers
• Update the note when arXiv HTML provides significant new information relevant to the question

---

WORKFLOW

1. Resolve paper identity

Fuzzy matching:

• Search Reading/ directory for files matching the provided title/keyword
• Use glob pattern: Reading/*<keyword>*.md
• If multiple matches, pick the closest match or ask user to disambiguate
• If no match, inform user the paper is not in the vault

Validation:

• Confirm the matched file exists in Reading/
• Extract paper title from file name

2. Read the paper note

• Read the full paper note from Reading/<paper title>.md
• Extract all sections and content
• Extract the url field from YAML frontmatter (needed for fallback)
• Extract linked projects from "Linked Research Projects" section

3. Attempt to answer from the note

Evaluate confidence:

• Can the question be fully answered using information in the note?
• Is the answer specific enough, or would it benefit from more detail?

Confidence levels:

• HIGH: Answer is clearly and specifically covered in the note → answer directly, skip arXiv fetch
• MEDIUM: Answer is partially covered but lacks detail → answer from note, then fetch arXiv for enrichment
• LOW: Answer is not covered in the note at all → must fetch arXiv HTML

If HIGH confidence: Answer the question using note content. Done.

If MEDIUM or LOW: Proceed to step 4.

4. Fetch arXiv HTML (fallback)

Get the URL:

• Use the url field from the paper note's YAML frontmatter
• The URL should be an arXiv HTML link (e.g., https://arxiv.org/html/[paper-id])
• If URL is missing or none, inform user and attempt to find it via paper title search

Fetch with targeted prompt:

• Use WebFetch with a prompt specifically targeting the user's question
• Do NOT extract the entire paper — focus the prompt on the relevant section
• Example prompt: "Find information about [specific topic from question] in this paper. Look in methods, results, and discussion sections."

Token efficiency:

• Craft the WebFetch prompt to extract only the information needed to answer the question
• Avoid generic "extract everything" prompts
• If the question is about methods → target methods section
• If the question is about results → target results/experiments section
• If the question is about a specific concept → target the relevant section + definitions

5. Answer the question

Format:

• Bullet points preferred (consistent with vault style)
• Cite specific sections/figures/tables when possible
• If project context is relevant, mention which linked projects the answer connects to
• Be concise — answer the question, don't summarize the whole paper

Source attribution:

• If answered from note only: no attribution needed
• If answered from arXiv HTML: note that this information was fetched from the paper directly

6. Update the paper note (when arXiv HTML was fetched)

When to update:

• Only when arXiv HTML provided information NOT already in the note
• Only when the new information is significant (not trivial details)
• Only add information relevant to the question and the note's existing structure

How to update:

• Identify the most appropriate existing section in the note for the new information
• Add bullet points under the relevant subsection
• Do NOT restructure or rewrite existing content
• Do NOT add new sections — use existing template sections only
• Keep additions concise (1-3 bullets max)

What to add:

• Specific technical details that enrich an existing section
• Key results or numbers not captured in the note
• Method details that clarify the approach
• Important caveats or nuances

What NOT to add:

• Information already in the note (even if phrased differently)
• Tangential details not related to the question
• Full section rewrites

After updating:

• Briefly inform the user what was added to the note and where

---

HANDLING EDGE CASES

Paper not in vault

• Inform user: "Paper not found in Reading/. Would you like me to read it first using /read_paper?"

No arXiv URL in frontmatter

• Check if url field is none or missing
• Inform user the URL is not available
• Suggest adding the URL to the frontmatter

Question requires cross-referencing

• If the question implicitly compares to another paper, answer only for the target paper
• Mention: "For comparison with [other paper], you could run /ask_paper on that paper as well."

Question about linked projects

• Read the linked project files if needed to provide project-relevant context
• Only read projects listed in the "Linked Research Projects" section
• Keep project context brief — focus on the paper question

---

TOKEN EFFICIENCY

Optimizations:

• Always try note first (zero web cost)
• Targeted WebFetch prompts (skip irrelevant paper sections)
• Read only the specific project files if project context is needed
• Single WebFetch call in most cases

Expected cost:

• Note-only answer: ~50 tokens (just file read)
• ArXiv fallback: ~100-200 tokens (one targeted WebFetch)

---

OUTPUT RULES

• Bullet points preferred
• Concise, direct answers
• Cite sections/figures/tables when referencing arXiv content
• Mention source (note vs arXiv) only when arXiv was fetched
• If note was updated, report what was added and where
• No essays — answer the question and stop

---

SELF-CHECK

✅ Did I search Reading/ for the paper using fuzzy matching? ✅ Did I read the full paper note before attempting to answer? ✅ Did I evaluate confidence before fetching arXiv HTML? ✅ Did I use a targeted WebFetch prompt (not generic)? ✅ Did I answer concisely with bullet points? ✅ If I fetched arXiv: did I update the note with significant new information? ✅ If I updated the note: did I inform the user what was added? ✅ Did I reference linked projects when relevant to the question?