Not in the top 1,000 by GitHub stars
Zsun79/LitReviewSkill
LitReview Skill is an installable agent skill for end-to-end literature review generation. It helps agents conduct literature reviews with a well-designed and widely used review framework so the search process is broad, iterative, and less likely to miss relevant articles.
History
Review weekly changes to SKILL.md before updating. Dates mark the weeks in which we observed each version; checks apply to the recorded commits.
View weekly changes
skills/write-literature-review/SKILL.md
Week of Nov 2, 2026 · Line counts unavailable
Before Not checked yet → After Network or broad shell
First observation → a53cd419352e
No earlier version was observed for comparison.
29GitHub stars
2stars in 7 days
1skill in this repository
0commits in 30 days
Heat
2.5- Star growth, last 7 daysNot available
- Star growth, last 24 hoursNot available
- Rank movement, last 7 daysNot available
- Commits, last 30 daysNot available
- Accounts asking about it through MCP, last 7 daysNot available
- Hot votes this weekNot available
Heat never changes the order by stars, and sponsorship never touches it. How heat works
Stars over time
30-day change not yet available: not enough history.
Individual skills in this repository
- write-literature-review
skills/write-literature-review
How it works
write-literature-review
When your agent uses it
Iterative literature-review workflow for a research topic. Use this skill to draft up to 10 search keywords, build a seed set from OpenAlex title-and-abstract matches, expand by backward and forward citations, screen candidates by title and abstract, repeat until no new relevant papers remain, rank the final set, inspect up to 30 full texts, build a concept-reference knowledge graph, and write a literature review grounded only in the final included references.
What it loads into context
Frontmatter
99 tokensAlways available to the agent
SKILL.md
1,178 tokensWhen the skill is activated
Reference documents
5,223 tokensLoaded on request
Token counts are estimates. Scripts run separately; they are not counted as reference context.
The playbook
- Overview
- Workflow
- Workspace Layout
- Deliverables
- Subtasks
- Screening Rules
- References
Scripts executed separately
scripts/build_knowledge_graph.pyscripts/lit_review_pipeline.py
Files
SKILL.mdcore5,603 bytesSKILL.mdcore5,603 bytesagents/openai.yamlasset238 bytesreferences/citation format/APA.mddoc846 bytesreferences/citation format/Chicago Author-Date.mddoc903 bytesreferences/citation format/Harvard.mddoc938 bytesreferences/citation format/IEEE.mddoc808 bytesreferences/citation format/MLA.mddoc723 bytesreferences/citation format/Vancouver.mddoc748 bytesreferences/review_template.mddoc2,267 bytesreferences/review_writing.mddoc4,065 bytesreferences/workflow.mddoc8,928 bytesreferences/workflow_logging.mddoc3,251 bytesscripts/build_knowledge_graph.pyruns7,834 bytesscripts/lit_review_pipeline.pyruns30,727 bytes
No excerpt is shown for this license. Read the source on GitHub.
View the complete source on GitHubSkills included
- write-literature-review
Repository facts
- License
- No license detected
- Created
- Apr 23, 2026
- Last pushed
- Jun 8, 2026
- Forks
- 4
- Open issues
- 0
- Project activity
- Slowing
Before you install
Network or broad shellAutomated signals, not a guarantee
Checked Nov 6, 2026
Not fully analyzed: some files were too long, unreadable or missing. This never lowers the level.
Show 1 note
skills/write-literature-review/SKILL.md:1Analysis incomplete: Referenced executable target unavailable; not analyzed
- No broad tool permissions
- No dangerous shell commands
- 1 obfuscation signalin 1 file: write-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:279
- No instruction overrides
- 2 executable scriptsin 2 files: write-literature-review/scripts/build_knowledge_graph.py:1 write-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:1
- 13 references to secretsin 1 file: write-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:300
- No requests to vote in Hot
Show all 32 signals by file
skills/write-literature-review/references/citation format/APA.md
- Network accessline 9
Lee, M., & Carter, J. (2021). Auditable workflows for systematic literature mapping. *Journal of Research Synthesis, 14*(2), 101-119. https://doi.org/10.0000/jrs.2021.0142 - Network accessline 11
Nguyen, P., Alvarez, S., & Brooks, T. (2023). Iterative citation expansion for high-recall evidence reviews. *International Journal of Digital Scholarship, 9*(1), 44-63. https://doi.org/10.0000/ijds.2023.0914
skills/write-literature-review/references/citation format/Chicago Author-Date.md
- Network accessline 9
Lee, Maya, and Jordan Carter. 2021. "Auditable Workflows for Systematic Literature Mapping." *Journal of Research Synthesis* 14 (2): 101-19. https://doi.org/10.0000/jrs.2021.0142. - Network accessline 11
Nguyen, Priya, Sofia Alvarez, and Thomas Brooks. 2023. "Iterative Citation Expansion for High-Recall Evidence Reviews." *International Journal of Digital Scholarship* 9 (1): 44-63. https://doi.org/10.0000/ijds.2023.0914.
skills/write-literature-review/references/citation format/Harvard.md
- Network accessline 9
Lee, M. and Carter, J. 2021, 'Auditable workflows for systematic literature mapping', *Journal of Research Synthesis*, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 101-119, viewed 8 June 2026, <https://doi.org/10.0000/jrs.2021.0142>. - Network accessline 11
Nguyen, P., Alvarez, S. and Brooks, T. 2023, 'Iterative citation expansion for high-recall evidence reviews', *International Journal of Digital Scholarship*, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 44-63, viewed 8 June 2026, <https://doi.org/10.0000/ijds.2023.0
skills/write-literature-review/scripts/build_knowledge_graph.py
- Executable scriptline 1
#!/usr/bin/env python3
skills/write-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py
- Executable scriptline 1
#!/usr/bin/env python3 - Network accessline 18
OPENALEX_WORKS = "https://api.openalex.org/works" - Network accessline 19
CORE_SEARCH = "https://api.core.ac.uk/v3/search/works/" - Network accessline 27
headers = headers or {} for attempt in range(retries): req = urllib.request.Request(url, headers={"User-Agent": "write-literature-review-skill", **headers}) - Network accessline 28
for attempt in range(retries): req = urllib.request.Request(url, headers={"User-Agent": "write-literature-review-skill", **headers}) try: - Network accessline 29
req = urllib.request.Request(url, headers={"User-Agent": "write-literature-review-skill", **headers}) - Network accessline 30
try: with urllib.request.urlopen(req, timeout=45) as resp: return json.loads(resp.read().decode("utf-8")) - Network accessline 31
with urllib.request.urlopen(req, timeout=45) as resp: - Possible obfuscationline 279
pdf = bytearray(b"%PDF-1.4\n%\xe2\xe3\xcf\xd3\n") - Access to secretsline 300
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 304
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 305
[Credential-related source omitted] - Network accessline 314
seen: dict[str, dict[str, Any]] = {} for row in rows: doi = (row.get("doi") or "").lower().replace("https://doi.org/", "").strip() - Network accessline 315
for row in rows: doi = (row.get("doi") or "").lower().replace("https://doi.org/", "").strip() title = title_key(row) - Network accessline 316
doi = (row.get("doi") or "").lower().replace("https://doi.org/", "").strip() - Access to secretsline 402
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 421
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 437
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 445
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 451
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 457
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 529
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 567
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 578
[Credential-related source omitted] - Access to secretsline 625
[Credential-related source omitted]
How the signals fit together
Facts from a static read of the files at the pinned commit. They describe what the code does, not why.
Declared and executed: 3 facts
- Contacts api.openalex.org, which SKILL.md, the README and the plugin manifest do not mentionwrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:18High confidence
- Contacts api.core.ac.uk, which SKILL.md, the README and the plugin manifest do not mentionwrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:19High confidence
- Contacts doi.org, which SKILL.md, the README and the plugin manifest do not mentionwrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:316High confidence
Signal confidence: 32 facts
- Network access in prose of documentationwrite-literature-review/references/citation format/APA.md:9Low confidence
- Network access in prose of documentationwrite-literature-review/references/citation format/APA.md:11Low confidence
- Network access in prose of documentationwrite-literature-review/references/citation format/Chicago Author-Date.md:9Low confidence
- Network access in prose of documentationwrite-literature-review/references/citation format/Chicago Author-Date.md:11Low confidence
- Network access in prose of documentationwrite-literature-review/references/citation format/Harvard.md:9Low confidence
- Network access in prose of documentationwrite-literature-review/references/citation format/Harvard.md:11Low confidence
- Executable script in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/build_knowledge_graph.py:1High confidence
- Executable script in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:1High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:18High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:19High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:27High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:28High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:29High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:30High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:31High confidence
- Possible obfuscation in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:279High confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runs: a variable, placeholder or call, not a stored valuewrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:300Low confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:304High confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:305High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:314High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:315High confidence
- Network access in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:316High confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:402High confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runs: a variable, placeholder or call, not a stored valuewrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:421Low confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runs: a variable, placeholder or call, not a stored valuewrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:437Low confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runs: a variable, placeholder or call, not a stored valuewrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:445Low confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runs: a variable, placeholder or call, not a stored valuewrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:451Low confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runs: a variable, placeholder or call, not a stored valuewrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:457Low confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:529High confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:567High confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:578High confidence
- Access to secrets in code of a file that runswrite-literature-review/scripts/lit_review_pipeline.py:625High confidence
Works with
| Agent | Status | Evidence | Install to |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | Compatible | Standard SKILL.md skills/write-literature-review/SKILL.md | .claude/skills/<skill-name>/ |
| Codex | Compatible | Standard SKILL.md skills/write-literature-review/SKILL.md | .agents/skills/<skill-name>/ |
| Cursor | Compatible | Standard SKILL.md skills/write-literature-review/SKILL.md | .cursor/skills/<skill-name>/ |
| Gemini CLI | Compatible | Standard SKILL.md skills/write-literature-review/SKILL.md | .gemini/skills/<skill-name>/ |
| GitHub Copilot | Compatible | Standard SKILL.md skills/write-literature-review/SKILL.md | .github/skills/<skill-name>/ |
| OpenCode | Compatible | Standard SKILL.md skills/write-literature-review/SKILL.md | .opencode/skills/<skill-name>/ |
- Native The repository ships a manifest, folder or frontmatter field for this agent.
- Compatible A standard SKILL.md that this agent can read.
- Unknown No evidence either way.
Derived automatically from paths, manifests and frontmatter. Not tested on each agent.
