academic-citation
Skill4 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Verify, format, and insert scholarly citations with OmniScholar. Use for APA, IEEE, GB/T 7714 and other styles, citation-network evidence, bibliography generation, candidate discovery, or verified citation insertion.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- joshua-zyy/academic-paper-writertheir own version, first seen Jun 27, 2026
- XYD-GIS/paper-toolkitstheir own version, first seen Jun 10, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- joshua-zyy/academic-paper-writer★ 111same name
- XYD-GIS/paper-toolkits★ 12same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository9 other files it gives its agents.
- chemical-dataSkill
- literature-readingSkill
- materials-projectSkill
- obsidian-literature-baseSkill
- omnischolarSkill
- paper-readingSkill
- scholar-searchSkill
- scientific-figureSkill
- zotero-researchSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 9
Follow the user's language and requested citation style.
- Very specific: line 15
Use ai4scholar_citation_candidates only as a paid candidate-retrieval workflow.
- Very specific: line 16
Use ai4scholar_cite only for a known Google Scholar result ID returned by the provider contract.
- Distinctive: line 17
Verify author order, title, venue, year, volume, issue, pages, DOI, and style punctuation against source evidence.
≈ “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.
Files
Academic citation
Follow the user's language and requested citation style. Never invent references, identifiers, pages, or evidence.
Keep retrieval and formatting separate
- Determine whether the user needs evidence discovery, identity verification, formatting, a bibliography, or insertion into prose.
- Retrieve and verify sources with
literature_search,literature_get, and when relevantliterature_graph. A retrieved candidate is not yet proof that it supports a claim. - Use
ai4scholar_citation_candidatesonly as a paid candidate-retrieval workflow. Review relevance and stable identifiers before selecting anything. - Use
ai4scholar_citeonly for a known Google Scholar result ID returned by the provider contract. Do not guess an ID from a title, cluster, URL, or citation text. - Verify author order, title, venue, year, volume, issue, pages, DOI, and style punctuation against source evidence.
- Separate verified references from candidates requiring manual confirmation.
- Preserve the user's wording and evidence strength; citation insertion must not strengthen the claim.
If citation formatting is unavailable or the provider returns no contractual result ID, format locally only from verified metadata and label fields that remain incomplete. If no verification provider is configured, ask for a DOI/PMID/arXiv ID or use a read-only Zotero record; never turn an unverified title into a formal citation.
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
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.