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
- SkillMedev/academic-researchertheir own version, first seen Oct 5, 2026
- xcrrr/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Mar 19, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- xcrrr/claude-skills★ 6same name
- 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.
- academic-editorSkill
- citation-checkerSkill
- citation-fixerSkill
- citation-helperSkill
- project-reportSkill
- proposal-graderSkill
- research-proposalSkill
- systematic-reviewSkill
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
- Distinctive: line 16
Use when the user asks you to:
- Distinctive: line 17
Write an academic essay on any topic
- Distinctive: line 20
Create a research synthesis or critical review paper
- Distinctive: line 21
Write a course essay requiring theoretical argumentation and citations
- Distinctive: line 60
Search strategy (full strategy for at least one database)
- Distinctive: line 90
Create search strategy (PCC: Population-Concept-Context)
- Distinctive: line 151
Document study selection across four phases:
- Distinctive: line 163
Avoid colloquialisms, contractions, and informal language
- Distinctive: line 174
Do not merely summarise sources.
- Very specific: line 187
Read ../../references/apa7-guide.md for the complete APA 7 reference.
- Very specific: line 199
Use the docx skill's infrastructure for Word document creation.
- Very specific: line 220
When drafting content that requires citations, use the /scholar:citation-helper skill to search the researcher's Zotero library (the Zotero …
- Very specific: line 224
For each claim needing a citation: Search the Zotero library first using /scholar:citation-helper (Operation 1: Search Library or Operation …
- Very specific: line 225
Insert Pandoc citation keys: Use [@citekey] format from the CSL-JSON id field (e.g., [@moore.westley2011])
- Distinctive: line 232
When searching for sources to cite, follow this order:
- Very specific: line 247
After drafting is complete, use /scholar:citation-helper (Operation 4: Generate Reference List) to:
- Very specific: line 249
Look up each key in the Zotero CSL-JSON library configured in the plugin's .local.md file (default: references/salsu-library.json)
- Very specific: line 271
Search Zotero library: Use /scholar:citation-helper to find relevant sources for each argument
- Very specific: line 273
Generate reference list: Use /scholar:citation-helper Operation 4 to build the reference list from cited keys
- Very specific: line 283
Search Zotero library: Use /scholar:citation-helper to get citation keys for all included studies
- Very specific: line 285
Generate reference list: Use /scholar:citation-helper Operation 4
≈ “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 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:
- Title Page (title, author, course, institution, date)
- Introduction (~10-15% of total words)
- Hook/context
- Problem statement or research question
- Thesis statement
- Essay roadmap
- Body Sections (~70-80% of total words)
- Each section = one major argument or theme
- Topic sentence, evidence, analysis, connection to thesis
- Theory integration throughout
- Conclusion (~10-15% of total words)
- Restate thesis (rephrased)
- Synthesise key arguments
- Implications or future directions
- References (APA 7)
Type 2: Systematic Literature Review
For PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic reviews of empirical research.
Structure (PRISMA 2020):
- Title (identify as systematic review; include "systematic review" in title)
- Structured Abstract (Background, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusions)
- Introduction (rationale, objectives, research questions)
- 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
- Results
- Study selection (PRISMA flow diagram)
- Study characteristics
- Risk of bias findings
- Results of individual studies
- Results of syntheses
- Discussion (interpretation, limitations, implications)
- References
- 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:
- Identify research question(s)
- Create search strategy (PCC: Population-Concept-Context)
- Identify relevant studies
- Review and select studies
- Extract and chart data
- Analyse and present results
Systematic Review Methodology
PICO Framework (Question Formulation)
| Element | Description | Example |
| 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:
- Date restrictions (publication year range)
- Exposure/intervention of interest
- Geographic location
- Language
- Participants/population
- Peer review status
- Reported outcomes
- Setting
- Study design
- 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) | Year | Population | Intervention/Exposure | Outcomes | Quality Appraisal | Key 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:
- Topic sentence (claim)
- Evidence (citation + data)
- Analysis (interpret the evidence)
- 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.
| Situation | Format |
| 1 author | (Author, Year) |
| 2 authors | (Author & Author, Year) |
| 3+ authors | (Author et al., Year) |
| Direct quote | (Author et al., Year, p. XX) |
| Narrative | Author 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
- For each claim needing a citation: Search the Zotero library first using
/scholar:citation-helper(Operation 1: Search Library or Operation 5: Suggest Citations) - Insert Pandoc citation keys: Use
[@citekey]format from the CSL-JSONidfield (e.g.,[@moore.westley2011]) - Multiple sources:
[@key1; @key2; @key3] - Narrative citations:
@citekey(e.g.,@moore.westley2011 argue that...) - 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:
- Extract all
[@citekey]citations from the document - Look up each key in the Zotero CSL-JSON library configured in the plugin's
.local.mdfile (default:references/salsu-library.json) - Format as APA 7 reference entries
- Sort alphabetically
- 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.docxProcess
For Standard Essays
- Clarify the brief: Word count, topic, required theories, citation expectations
- Develop thesis: Clear, arguable, specific
- Outline sections: Each body section = one major argument
- Search Zotero library: Use
/scholar:citation-helperto find relevant sources for each argument - Draft with citations: Integrate evidence using
[@citekey]format throughout - Generate reference list: Use
/scholar:citation-helperOperation 4 to build the reference list from cited keys - Build DOCX: Professional formatting with docx-js (or Pandoc with
--citeprocfor automatic citation rendering) - Verify: Word count, citation completeness, argument coherence
For Literature Reviews
- Define research question using PICO or PCC framework
- Establish inclusion/exclusion criteria across 10 categories
- Document search strategy with full Boolean strings
- Screen and select studies (simulate PRISMA flow)
- Extract data into review matrix
- Search Zotero library: Use
/scholar:citation-helperto get citation keys for all included studies - Synthesise findings thematically or by outcome, citing with
[@citekey] - Generate reference list: Use
/scholar:citation-helperOperation 4 - Write manuscript following PRISMA 2020 or PRISMA-ScR
- Build DOCX with all required sections and appendices
- 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
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.

