agentleFS
mcmespinaamcmespinaa/scholar-support/skills/academic-essay/SKILL.md

academic-essay

Skill2 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

**Academic Essay & Literature Review Writer**: Creates structured academic essays, systematic literature reviews, scoping reviews, and research papers with PRISMA compliance, PICO frameworks, and APA 7 citations. Outputs professional .docx files.

2 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions2 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 2

    1. xcrrr/claude-skills★ 6same name
    2. SkillMedev/academic-researcher★ 3same 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 repository8 other files it gives its agents.

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

21 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 11 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈10

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 11

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use when the user asks you to:

    line 16
  2. Distinctive:

    Write an academic essay on any topic

    line 17
  3. Distinctive:

    Create a research synthesis or critical review paper

    line 20
  4. Distinctive:

    Write a course essay requiring theoretical argumentation and citations

    line 21
  5. Distinctive:

    Search strategy (full strategy for at least one database)

    line 60
  6. Distinctive:

    Create search strategy (PCC: Population-Concept-Context)

    line 90
  7. Distinctive:

    Document study selection across four phases:

    line 151
  8. Distinctive:

    Avoid colloquialisms, contractions, and informal language

    line 163
  9. Distinctive:

    Do not merely summarise sources.

    line 174
  10. Very specific:

    Read ../../references/apa7-guide.md for the complete APA 7 reference.

    line 187
  11. Very specific:

    Use the docx skill's infrastructure for Word document creation.

    line 199
  12. Very specific:

    When drafting content that requires citations, use the /scholar:citation-helper skill to search the researcher's Zotero library (the Zotero …

    line 220
  13. Very specific:

    For each claim needing a citation: Search the Zotero library first using /scholar:citation-helper (Operation 1: Search Library or Operation …

    line 224
  14. Very specific:

    Insert Pandoc citation keys: Use [@citekey] format from the CSL-JSON id field (e.g., [@moore.westley2011])

    line 225
  15. Distinctive:

    When searching for sources to cite, follow this order:

    line 232
  16. Very specific:

    After drafting is complete, use /scholar:citation-helper (Operation 4: Generate Reference List) to:

    line 247
  17. Very specific:

    Look up each key in the Zotero CSL-JSON library configured in the plugin's .local.md file (default: references/salsu-library.json)

    line 249
  18. Very specific:

    Search Zotero library: Use /scholar:citation-helper to find relevant sources for each argument

    line 271
  19. Very specific:

    Generate reference list: Use /scholar:citation-helper Operation 4 to build the reference list from cited keys

    line 273
  20. Very specific:

    Search Zotero library: Use /scholar:citation-helper to get citation keys for all included studies

    line 283
  21. Very specific:

    Generate reference list: Use /scholar:citation-helper Operation 4

    line 285

≈ “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

Academic Essay & Systematic Literature Review Skill

Overview

This skill produces professional academic essays and literature reviews as .docx files. It covers the full spectrum from standard argumentative essays to PRISMA-compliant systematic and scoping reviews. The skill embeds best practices from established review methodologies (PRISMA 2020, PRISMA-ScR, PROSPERO, JBI Manual) while remaining flexible for simpler essay formats.

When to Use This Skill

Use when the user asks you to:

  • Write an academic essay on any topic
  • Conduct or write up a systematic literature review
  • Produce a scoping review following PRISMA-ScR guidelines
  • Create a research synthesis or critical review paper
  • Write a course essay requiring theoretical argumentation and citations
  • Draft a manuscript following systematic review templates
  • Help with any academic writing that requires evidence-based argumentation

Document Types & Structures

Type 1: Standard Academic Essay

For course essays, argumentative papers, critical analyses, and reflection papers.

Structure:

  1. Title Page (title, author, course, institution, date)
  2. Introduction (~10-15% of total words)
    • Hook/context
    • Problem statement or research question
    • Thesis statement
    • Essay roadmap
  3. Body Sections (~70-80% of total words)
    • Each section = one major argument or theme
    • Topic sentence, evidence, analysis, connection to thesis
    • Theory integration throughout
  4. Conclusion (~10-15% of total words)
    • Restate thesis (rephrased)
    • Synthesise key arguments
    • Implications or future directions
  5. References (APA 7)

Type 2: Systematic Literature Review

For PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic reviews of empirical research.

Structure (PRISMA 2020):

  1. Title (identify as systematic review; include "systematic review" in title)
  2. Structured Abstract (Background, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusions)
  3. Introduction (rationale, objectives, research questions)
  4. Methods
    • Registration and protocol (PROSPERO ID if applicable)
    • Eligibility criteria (PICO framework)
    • Information sources (databases, date ranges)
    • Search strategy (full strategy for at least one database)
    • Selection process (screening steps, reviewer count)
    • Data collection process
    • Data items
    • Risk of bias assessment
    • Effect measures
    • Synthesis methods
  5. Results
    • Study selection (PRISMA flow diagram)
    • Study characteristics
    • Risk of bias findings
    • Results of individual studies
    • Results of syntheses
  6. Discussion (interpretation, limitations, implications)
  7. References
  8. Appendices (search strategies, excluded studies, quality assessment tools)

Type 3: Scoping Review

For PRISMA-ScR compliant scoping reviews that map the extent of research on a topic.

Key differences from systematic review:

  • Broader research questions (exploratory rather than evaluative)
  • Uses "Charting Methods" instead of "Synthesis Methods"
  • Critical appraisal is optional (not mandatory)
  • Focus on mapping the landscape rather than synthesising effect sizes
  • Results presented as thematic categories or conceptual maps

Structure follows PRISMA-ScR with adaptations from JBI Manual and Arksey & O'Malley (2005) 6-step framework:

  1. Identify research question(s)
  2. Create search strategy (PCC: Population-Concept-Context)
  3. Identify relevant studies
  4. Review and select studies
  5. Extract and chart data
  6. Analyse and present results

Systematic Review Methodology

PICO Framework (Question Formulation)

ElementDescriptionExample
P (Population)Who are the participants?Adults aged 18-65 with type 2 diabetes
I (Intervention)What is being studied?Digital health interventions
C (Comparison)Against what?Standard care or no intervention
O (Outcome)What is measured?HbA1c levels, quality of life

Five question types:

  • Therapy: Does intervention X improve outcome Y in population Z?
  • Etiology: Does exposure X increase risk of outcome Y?
  • Diagnosis: How accurate is test X for condition Y?
  • Prevention: Does intervention X reduce incidence of Y?
  • Prognosis: What happens to patients with condition X over time?

Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria (10 Categories)

Define clear criteria across these dimensions:

  1. Date restrictions (publication year range)
  2. Exposure/intervention of interest
  3. Geographic location
  4. Language
  5. Participants/population
  6. Peer review status
  7. Reported outcomes
  8. Setting
  9. Study design
  10. Type of publication

Search Strategy

Database selection: Choose databases appropriate to the field:

  • Health: PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, PsycINFO
  • Social Sciences: Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, ProQuest
  • Multidisciplinary: Google Scholar (supplementary only)

Search documentation: Record for each database:

  • Database name and platform
  • Date of search
  • Complete search string (Boolean operators, MeSH terms, wildcards)
  • Number of results
  • Export format

Review Matrix

For organising extracted data from included studies:

Author(s)YearPopulationIntervention/ExposureOutcomesQuality AppraisalKey Findings

PRISMA Flow Diagram

Document study selection across four phases:

  • Identification: Records from databases + other sources
  • Screening: Records after duplicates removed, records screened, records excluded
  • Eligibility: Full-text articles assessed, articles excluded with reasons
  • Included: Studies in qualitative synthesis, studies in quantitative synthesis (if meta-analysis)

Writing Quality Standards

Academic Voice

  • Third person unless discipline conventions allow first person
  • Hedging language for uncertain claims ("suggests," "indicates," "may")
  • Active voice for clarity where appropriate
  • Avoid colloquialisms, contractions, and informal language
  • Define technical terms on first use

Argumentation Structure

Each body paragraph should follow this pattern:

  1. Topic sentence (claim)
  2. Evidence (citation + data)
  3. Analysis (interpret the evidence)
  4. Connection (link back to thesis/research question)

Critical Engagement with Sources

  • Do not merely summarise sources; analyse, compare, and synthesise
  • Identify agreements, contradictions, and gaps across studies
  • Evaluate methodological quality and limitations
  • Position your argument within the existing debate

Citation Density

  • Introduction: moderate (establish context)
  • Literature review/body: high (every claim needs support)
  • Discussion: moderate (interpretation + new citations)
  • Conclusion: low (synthesis of own arguments)

Citation Style (APA 7)

Read ../../references/apa7-guide.md for the complete APA 7 reference.

SituationFormat
1 author(Author, Year)
2 authors(Author & Author, Year)
3+ authors(Author et al., Year)
Direct quote(Author et al., Year, p. XX)
NarrativeAuthor et al. (Year) argue that...

Document Generation

Use the docx skill's infrastructure for Word document creation.

Page Setup

// Standard portrait
{ width: 12240, height: 15840, margin: { top: 1440, right: 1440, bottom: 1440, left: 1440 } }

Typography

  • Body: Arial or Times New Roman, 12pt (size: 24 half-points)
  • Line spacing: double (line: 480)
  • Paragraph spacing: 200 after
  • Headings: Bold, hierarchical sizing (H1: 16pt, H2: 13pt, H3: 12pt)

Reference List Formatting

  • Hanging indent: indent: { left: 720, hanging: 720 }
  • Alphabetical by first author surname
  • Include DOI as hyperlink where available

Zotero Integration (Citation Helper)

When drafting content that requires citations, use the /scholar:citation-helper skill to search the researcher's Zotero library (the Zotero CSL-JSON library configured in the plugin's .local.md file (default: references/salsu-library.json)) before web searching for sources.

Citation Workflow During Drafting

  1. For each claim needing a citation: Search the Zotero library first using /scholar:citation-helper (Operation 1: Search Library or Operation 5: Suggest Citations)
  2. Insert Pandoc citation keys: Use [@citekey] format from the CSL-JSON id field (e.g., [@moore.westley2011])
  3. Multiple sources: [@key1; @key2; @key3]
  4. Narrative citations: @citekey (e.g., @moore.westley2011 argue that...)
  5. With page numbers: [@citekey, p. 15]

Source Lookup Priority

When searching for sources to cite, follow this order:

0. ZOTERO: Search the Zotero CSL-JSON library configured in the plugin's `.local.md` file (default: `references/salsu-library.json`) by author, title, keyword, year
   ├── Match found → Use [@citekey] directly — researcher already has this source
   └── No match ↓
1. LOCAL PDFs: Search the local PDFs directory configured in `.local.md` for relevant papers
   └── No match ↓
2. WEB SEARCH: Search for additional academic sources (fallback)

Prioritise sources the researcher already has. Label suggestions with [ZOTERO], [LOCAL], or [WEB].

Reference List Generation

After drafting is complete, use /scholar:citation-helper (Operation 4: Generate Reference List) to:

  1. Extract all [@citekey] citations from the document
  2. Look up each key in the Zotero CSL-JSON library configured in the plugin's .local.md file (default: references/salsu-library.json)
  3. Format as APA 7 reference entries
  4. Sort alphabetically
  5. Flag any citation keys not found in the Zotero library

Pandoc Rendering (Optional)

To produce a formatted .docx with resolved APA 7 citations, use the Zotero CSL-JSON library and the APA CSL file configured in .local.md:

pandoc paper.md \
  --citeproc \
  --bibliography=<path-to-csl-json-library> \
  --csl=<path-to-apa-csl-file> \
  -o paper.docx

Process

For Standard Essays

  1. Clarify the brief: Word count, topic, required theories, citation expectations
  2. Develop thesis: Clear, arguable, specific
  3. Outline sections: Each body section = one major argument
  4. Search Zotero library: Use /scholar:citation-helper to find relevant sources for each argument
  5. Draft with citations: Integrate evidence using [@citekey] format throughout
  6. Generate reference list: Use /scholar:citation-helper Operation 4 to build the reference list from cited keys
  7. Build DOCX: Professional formatting with docx-js (or Pandoc with --citeproc for automatic citation rendering)
  8. Verify: Word count, citation completeness, argument coherence

For Literature Reviews

  1. Define research question using PICO or PCC framework
  2. Establish inclusion/exclusion criteria across 10 categories
  3. Document search strategy with full Boolean strings
  4. Screen and select studies (simulate PRISMA flow)
  5. Extract data into review matrix
  6. Search Zotero library: Use /scholar:citation-helper to get citation keys for all included studies
  7. Synthesise findings thematically or by outcome, citing with [@citekey]
  8. Generate reference list: Use /scholar:citation-helper Operation 4
  9. Write manuscript following PRISMA 2020 or PRISMA-ScR
  10. Build DOCX with all required sections and appendices
  11. Verify completeness against PRISMA checklist

Reference Files

  • ../../references/apa7-guide.md — Complete APA 7 formatting rules
  • ../../references/prisma-checklist.md — PRISMA 2020 reporting items
  • ../../references/review-methodology.md — Detailed systematic review methodology guide

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.