lit-review
Structured literature search and synthesis with citation extraction and gap identification
Best use case
lit-review is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Structured literature search and synthesis with citation extraction and gap identification
Teams using lit-review should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/lit-review/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How lit-review Compares
| Feature / Agent | lit-review | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Structured literature search and synthesis with citation extraction and gap identification
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
Related Guides
Best AI Skills for Claude
Explore the best AI skills for Claude and Claude Code across coding, research, workflow automation, documentation, and agent operations.
AI Agents for Coding
Browse AI agent skills for coding, debugging, testing, refactoring, code review, and developer workflows across Claude, Cursor, and Codex.
Cursor vs Codex for AI Workflows
Compare Cursor and Codex for AI coding workflows, repository assistance, debugging, refactoring, and reusable developer skills.
SKILL.md Source
# Literature Review
Conduct a structured literature search and synthesis on the given topic.
**Input:** `$ARGUMENTS` — a topic, paper title, research question, or phenomenon to investigate.
---
## Steps
1. **Parse the topic** from `$ARGUMENTS`. If a specific paper is named, use it as the anchor.
2. **Search for related work** using available tools:
- Check `master_supporting_docs/supporting_papers/` for uploaded papers
- Use `WebSearch` to find recent publications (if available)
- Use `WebFetch` to access working paper repositories (if available)
- Read any existing `.bib` file for papers already in the project
3. **Organize findings** into these categories:
- **Theoretical contributions** — models, frameworks, mechanisms
- **Empirical findings** — key results, effect sizes, data sources
- **Methodological innovations** — new estimators, identification strategies, inference methods
- **Open debates** — unresolved disagreements in the literature
4. **Identify gaps and opportunities:**
- What questions remain unanswered?
- What data or methods could address them?
- Where do findings conflict?
5. **Extract citations** in BibTeX format for all papers discussed.
6. **Save the report** to `quality_reports/lit_review_[sanitized_topic].md`
---
## Output Format
```markdown
# Literature Review: [Topic]
**Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Query:** [Original query from user]
## Summary
[2-3 paragraph overview of the state of the literature]
## Key Papers
### [Author (Year)] — [Short Title]
- **Main contribution:** [1-2 sentences]
- **Method:** [Identification strategy / data]
- **Key finding:** [Result with effect size if available]
- **Relevance:** [Why it matters for our research]
[Repeat for 5-15 papers, ordered by relevance]
## Thematic Organization
### Theoretical Contributions
[Grouped discussion]
### Empirical Findings
[Grouped discussion with comparison across studies]
### Methodological Innovations
[Methods relevant to the topic]
## Gaps and Opportunities
1. [Gap 1 — what's missing and why it matters]
2. [Gap 2]
3. [Gap 3]
## Suggested Next Steps
- [Concrete actions: papers to read, data to obtain, methods to consider]
## BibTeX Entries
```bibtex
@article{...}
```
```
---
## Important
- **Be honest about uncertainty.** If you cannot verify a citation, say so.
- **Prioritize recent work** (last 5-10 years) unless seminal papers are older.
- **Note working papers vs published papers** — working papers may change.
- **Do NOT fabricate citations.** If you're unsure about a paper's details, flag it for the user to verify.Related Skills
review-r
Run the R code review protocol on R scripts. Checks code quality, reproducibility, domain correctness, and professional standards. Produces a report without editing files.
review-paper
Comprehensive manuscript review covering argument structure, econometric specification, citation completeness, and potential referee objections
pedagogy-review
Run holistic pedagogical review on lecture slides. Checks narrative arc, student prerequisites, worked examples, notation clarity, and deck pacing.
visual-audit
Perform adversarial visual audit of Quarto or Beamer slides checking for overflow, font consistency, box fatigue, and layout issues.
validate-bib
Validate bibliography entries against citations in all lecture files. Find missing entries and unused references.
translate-to-quarto
Translate Beamer LaTeX to Quarto RevealJS. Multi-phase workflow with TikZ extraction and QA.
slide-excellence
Multi-agent slide review (visual, pedagogy, proofreading). Use for comprehensive quality check before milestones.
research-ideation
Generate structured research questions, testable hypotheses, and empirical strategies from a topic or dataset
qa-quarto
Adversarial Quarto vs Beamer QA. Critic finds issues, fixer applies fixes, loops until APPROVED (max 5 rounds).
proofread
Run the proofreading protocol on lecture files. Checks grammar, typos, overflow, consistency, and academic writing quality. Produces a report without editing files.
learn
Extract reusable knowledge from the current session into a persistent skill. Use when you discover something non-obvious, create a workaround, or develop a multi-step workflow that future sessions would benefit from.
interview-me
Interactive interview to formalize a research idea into a structured specification with hypotheses and empirical strategy