EXECUTE a literature review now ('literatür taraması yap', 'run a review'): dispatch literature-scout to search and screen, collect user approval, loop source-analyst over approved sources, run synthesis, and optionally generate PRISMA flow diagram. --systematic adds the PRISMA counters and the reproducible search log, so a review the user merely calls 'systematic' ('sistematik olsun') belongs HERE. Use /slr instead only when the request names that pipeline's ARTEFACTS: specific databases queried one by one, PDFs downloaded and converted to markdown, per-database Excel sheets, section extraction to JSON. Gate: PROJECT.md must be complete (no TBD values).
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Um comando direto ignora o prompt de revisão. Verifique a origem antes de executá-lo.
Instruções da origem · Visualização somente leitura
name
lit-review
description
EXECUTE a literature review now ('literatür taraması yap', 'run a review'): dispatch literature-scout to search and screen, collect user approval, loop source-analyst over approved sources, run synthesis, and optionally generate PRISMA flow diagram. --systematic adds the PRISMA counters and the reproducible search log, so a review the user merely calls 'systematic' ('sistematik olsun') belongs HERE. Use /slr instead only when the request names that pipeline's ARTEFACTS: specific databases queried one by one, PDFs downloaded and converted to markdown, per-database Excel sheets, section extraction to JSON. Gate: PROJECT.md must be complete (no TBD values).
disable-model-invocation
true
argument-hint
[--systematic] [--fast] [--lang tr|en|both]
Literature Review Workflow
This skill orchestrates a full literature search → screening → extraction → synthesis cycle. It dispatches subagents (literature-scout, source-analyst) and synthesizes results in the main session.
Language: every user-facing string below (gates, aborts, summaries) is
written in Turkish, the kit's conversational default (CLAUDE.md). If the
active project's PROJECT.md sets Conversation language:en, present
the equivalent content in natural English — translate meaning and
structure (headings, bullets, ✅/❌ markers), don't reproduce the Turkish
text verbatim. This is independent of Search languages, which governs
which languages the literature search itself runs in.
GATE: PROJECT.md Complete
Check: Read PROJECT.md. Verify NO TBD values in these fields:
Read PROJECT.md. Compose the subagent input contract:
Topic: <from PROJECT.md>
RQs: <from PROJECT.md>
Inclusion criteria:
- Year range: [offer default: last 10 years, or ask]
- Language: <from --lang override or PROJECT.md>
- Study types: [empirical|review|thesis|other: ask user]
- Peer-reviewed: yes [offer choice]
- Exclude: predatory journals [built-in]
Mode: [systematic|exploratory]
Shortlist size: 20 [default; offer custom]
Paths: sources/registry.jsonl, search-log.md
Ask user:
Araştırmaya hangi yıl aralığını dahil edelim?
(Varsayılan: 2014–2024. Giriniz veya varsayılanı kabul edin)
Hangi çalışma türleri? (birden çok seçebilirsiniz)
1) Ampirik araştırma (experimental, observational)
2) Derleme (systematic, narrative, scoping)
3) Tez (BSc/MSc/PhD)
4) Diğer
Seçiminiz: [input]
3. Dispatch literature-scout
Call the literature-scout agent with:
The topic, RQs, criteria, mode, languages, and shortlist size from step 2.
The paths: sources/registry.jsonl, search-log.md location.
Expected return:
JSONL shortlist: ~20 records with venue_meta and relevance scores.
Language decision + rationale (2 lines).
Full search-log narrative (literature-scout has no Write tool) — write it to
sources/search-log.md now.
Registry stats (added count, duplicates, total in registry).
If blocked: print obstacle report and offer fallback (manual search, reduced scope, etc.). Do not advance without at least 10 candidates.
4. User Screening Approval
Display the shortlist to user:
ADAY KAYNAKLAR (20)
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
[Index] [Title] [Year] [Venue (WoS/Scopus/TR Dizin)] [Relevance] [Action]
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
1 Deep CNN... 2023 IEEE TPAMI (SCIE Q1) 0.95 ✓
2 Bearing fault 2022 Mech. Eng. Journal (Scopus) 0.92 ✓
3 Signal proc. 2021 [No index found] 0.85 ⚠
...
[Instructions: type "approve 1 2 3 4..." or "exclude 5 6..." or "predatory-drop"]
User reviews and marks:
✓ Include (read full-text)
✗ Exclude (record reason)
⚠ Warn if venue index is unknown or predatory flag present.
Record decisions via the canonical script (never a bare "approved" status
— registry_db.py's STATUSES enum is candidate/screened/included/excluded/duplicate,
matching the /slr pipeline):
Always pass --stage screening on an exclusion. It is what separates "the
screener dropped this" from "it passed screening and failed at full text" —
screening_score.py cannot recover the distinction from a final status alone,
and without it a later full-text exclusion is charged to the screening step.
Offer the accuracy check once per project, not every run (skip silently if
eval/screening/gold.jsonl already exists, and never volunteer it twice):
Bu taramanın sizinle ne kadar uyuştuğunu ölçmek isterseniz: adaylardan
rastgele ~50 kaydı kitin kararlarına bakmadan kendiniz eleyin
(eval/screening/gold.jsonl), sonra
python scripts/screening_score.py --gold eval/screening/gold.jsonl.
Kaçırılan dahil-edilebilir çalışma, hattın hiçbir yerinde iz bırakmayan tek
hata türü — onu yalnızca aynı kayıtları okuyan bir insan görebilir.
Ayrıntı: eval/screening/README.md.
5. Loop source-analyst Over Included Sources
For each source with status included:
If --fast flag: dispatch 3–5 source-analyst agents in parallel (warn user: "Parallel mode may cost more tokens").
3-sentence source appraisal (contribution, main weakness, RQ fit)
Rigor score 1–5
If source blocked (unreadable/paywalled): log as status: "unreadable" in registry and continue.
6. Report Progress
After all sources processed:
✅ Kaynak analizi tamamlandı.
İstatistikler:
Toplam onaylanan kaynaklar: [N]
Başarıyla işlenen: [N]
Okunabilmeyen: [N]
Oluşturulan kanıt kartları: [M] (EV-0001..EV-00M)
Sonraki: /outline komutu ile iskelet oluşturun.
7. Synthesis (in Main Session)
Now synthesis runs in the main session (this is valuable content; moving it to a subagent is wasteful).
Gaps identified (what the literature is missing = your research opportunity)
Optional — check the synthesis is reproducible from its own evidence.
The synthesis is model-written prose bound to a fixed evidence set, which is
the one shape that can be measured without any labels: render it a second and
third time into separate files (the runs must not see each other), then
Disagreement about which sources are cited, which quantities are reported or
how strongly a source is claimed means at least one rendering put something in
the text that did not come from the cards. Offer this; do not run it by
default — it costs N synthesis passes. Stability is not accuracy: a synthesis
that is consistently wrong scores 1.00.
8. If --systematic Mode: PRISMA Diagram & Search-Log
✅ Literatür taraması tamamlandı!
Çıktılar:
- sources/registry.jsonl: [N] kaynağın tamamı
- evidence/cards.jsonl: [M] kanıt kartı
- literature-synthesis.md: tematik sentez
[if --systematic: + search-log.md + PRISMA diyagramı]
Sonraki adımlar:
1. /outline — tez/makale iskeletini oluştur
2. /draft <bölüm> — bölüm taslağını yaz
3. /export-excel — matrisler için Excel'e aktar
GATES SUMMARY
Gate
Trigger
Action
PROJECT.md TBD fields
Yes
ABORT, explain which fields need filling
No inclusion criteria
Skipped by user
Offer defaults (year range, peer-reviewed only)
Scout returns 0 candidates
Yes
ABORT, ask to revise keywords or expand year range
Less than 5 approved sources
Yes
WARN: synthesis will be thin; suggest manual search
Source-analyst blocked on all
Yes
ABORT, ask for alternative PDFs or URLs
ARGUMENT DEFAULTS
--systematic: false (exploratory mode by default)
--fast: false (sequential by default; parallel costs more)
--lang: use PROJECT.md search_languages value
TOKEN ECONOMY NOTES
Scout context: hundreds of raw hits die here. Only shortlist returns (~100 tokens).
Analyst loop: sequential by default (N × ~1500 tokens); --fast = parallel (cost ↑ but speed ↑).
Synthesis: stays in main session (content is the output).
Parallelization cost decision: user sees --fast flag; document in README that it roughly 3–5x subagent costs.
ERROR MESSAGES (Turkish)
❌ PROJECT.md eksik: [fields]. Lütfen /new-project ile doldurun.
❌ Literatür taraması 0 sonuç döndürdü. Arama kriterlerini gözden geçirin.
❌ Kaynakların tamamı okunabilmeyen. Alternatif kaynaklar veya linkler sağlayın.
⚠️ Şüpheli dergi algılandı: [venue]. Dahil etmek istiyorsanız ise "force-include" yazın.
FOLLOWING STEPS
After lit-review completes:
User runs /outline to build paper skeleton from cards.
User runs /draft <section> to draft individual sections.
User may run /export-excel to see literature matrix in spreadsheet form.
