agentleFS
AlessandroCaforioAlessandroCaforio/Academic-Writing/.claude/skills/thesis-excellence/SKILL.md

thesis-excellence

Skill17 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub

Multi-agent thesis review — dispatches specialized agents based on scope, synthesizes combined report

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈6

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Run tectonic to verify compilation:

    line 20
  2. Distinctive:

    If compilation fails, report the error and stop.

    line 24
  3. Distinctive:

    Use the Task tool to fork to each agent in parallel where possible.

    line 40
  4. Distinctive:

    proofreader: Read the chapter(s) and produce a proofreading report

    line 41
  5. Distinctive:

    notation-checker: Check all math against the notation registry

    line 43
  6. Distinctive:

    If an agent fails or times out, note it and continue with others

    line 91

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Thesis Excellence Review

Orchestrate a comprehensive multi-agent review of the thesis. The argument specifies the scope.

Scope Options

  • all — Review the entire thesis (all written chapters)
  • 04_methodology / 05_results / etc. — Review a specific chapter
  • code — Review all analysis notebooks
  • pre-submit — Full pre-submission check (everything)

Orchestration Procedure

Step 1: Compile

Run tectonic to verify compilation:

cd /Users/alessandro/Projects/Tesi/thesis && tectonic main.tex 2>&1

If compilation fails, report the error and stop.

Step 2: Determine Agents to Dispatch

Based on the scope, select which agents to run:

ScopeAgents
Any .tex chapterproofreader, latex-auditor, notation-checker
Ch. 4 or Ch. 5+ causal-inference
Chapters with \citet/\citep+ literature-rag
code scopecode-reviewer
all or pre-submitAll agents

Step 3: Run Agents

Use the Task tool to fork to each agent in parallel where possible. For each agent:

  • proofreader: Read the chapter(s) and produce a proofreading report
  • latex-auditor: Compile and check cross-references, citations, formatting
  • notation-checker: Check all math against the notation registry
  • causal-inference: (only for Ch. 4/5) Deep methodology review
  • literature-rag: (only for chapters with citations) Verify top claims via RAG
  • code-reviewer: (only for code scope) Review notebooks

Step 4: Synthesize Report

Combine all agent reports into a unified assessment:

THESIS EXCELLENCE REPORT
=========================
Scope: [what was reviewed]
Date:  [date]

COMPILATION: [PASS/FAIL]

AGENT REPORTS:
├── Proofreader:       [summary + issue count]
├── LaTeX Auditor:     [summary + issue count]
├── Notation Checker:  [summary + issue count]
├── Causal Inference:  [summary + top recommendation]
├── Literature RAG:    [summary + verification rate]
└── Code Reviewer:     [summary + issue count]

QUALITY ASSESSMENT:
├── Clarity:       X/10
├── Rigor:         X/10
├── Consistency:   X/10
├── Completeness:  X/10
└── Presentation:  X/10
Overall: X.X/10

TOP 5 PRIORITY ACTIONS:
1. [highest priority improvement]
2. [second priority]
3. [third priority]
4. [fourth priority]
5. [fifth priority]

DETAILED FINDINGS:
[Include full agent reports below, organized by agent]

Important

  • Quality scores are ADVISORY ONLY — they never block any action
  • Focus the "priority actions" on items that would most improve the thesis
  • If an agent fails or times out, note it and continue with others
  • For pre-submit scope, be especially thorough — this is the final check before submission

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.