agentleFS
odinfreeodinfree/storm-ecdsa-harness/skills/elicit-research/SKILL.md

elicit-research

Skill4 starsChanged 20 days agoMITView on GitHub

Search academic literature through the Elicit API: papers, clinical trials, reports, systematic reviews and Research Agent sessions. Use when a question needs published evidence or an outside, literature-backed view. Needs your own Elicit API key.

  • Reads credentials

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈0

    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
  1. Very specific:

    Check GET /usage before a substantial new job.

    line 24
  2. Very specific:

    Search request example: {"query":"methods for reducing quantum resources in elliptic curve discrete logarithms","maxResults":10}.

    line 39

≈ “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

Elicit research

Use the Elicit API directly through scripts/elicit.py (Python 3 standard library plus curl). Resolve script paths relative to this skill folder. Authentication comes from ELICIT_API_KEY, then ~/.config/elicit/api-key with mode 600. Never put credentials in skill files, request JSON, output artifacts, or command arguments. The credential file is local configuration and must not be packaged with the skill. The client reads that file itself, so no export is needed. Each OS user or host needs its own copy with the same restricted permissions.

Choose the research workflow

  • Paper discovery: POST /search/papers. Start with a focused natural-language query and maxResults: 10 or 20. Use additional searches to cover terminology and opposing evidence as appropriate.
  • Registered trials: POST /search/trials; read its schema for trialFilters.
  • A synthesized research report: POST /sessions/reports, using researchQuestion; normal defaults retrieve 50 papers and extract 10. Set isPublic: false unless public access is requested.
  • An explicit systematic review: POST /sessions/systematic-reviews. Configure inclusion criteria and extraction questions to match the user's protocol. Read the endpoint schema before constructing the request: omitted stages are skipped. Fulltext screening requires abstract screening; report generation requires extraction.
  • Open-ended or iterative investigation: POST /sessions/agents with query. Follow events and artifacts; continue the same session through its /messages endpoint with message.

An Elicit research request authorizes appropriate research calls within its scope. Skill setup alone does not request a research run. Keep publication, sharing, and library changes within the user's requested scope. Do not substitute a long-running review for a simple paper lookup.

Execute and preserve evidence

For difficult technical questions, blocked research hypotheses, or an independent literature-backed perspective, use technical second-perspective workflow. Preserve the exact system invariants and turn findings into falsifiable implementation hypotheses.

  1. Check GET /usage before a substantial new job. Report actual quota limitations; do not enable extra usage or upgrade plans. Usage availability does not establish an exact job price.
  2. Save request JSON and complete response JSON in the task workspace. Use --body request.json --out response.json. Record query, filters, retrieval date, returned IDs, warnings, and paper identifiers.
  3. For asynchronous creation, save the returned session ID and URL immediately. Poll the corresponding typed detail endpoint; never create another session merely because the first is slow. Reports typically take 5–15 minutes. Use separate polls with approximately 20–30 second interruptible waits, keeping the user informed.
  4. Handle processing, completed, failed, and pausedForInsufficientQuota distinctly. For agents, inspect the events schema for cursor and completion semantics, preserve the cursor, and collect artifacts when the turn finishes. A created session or intermediate artifact is not a completed report. If a bounded polling period ends, return the ID and current state explicitly; resume that ID on continuation.
  5. Read the actual results before answering. Cite paper DOI or source URLs and distinguish abstract-only evidence from verified full text. Explain study design, conflicting results, and limitations relevant to the question. Elicit's generated synthesis is not independent verification of the underlying papers. Do not claim an exhaustive systematic review from a handful of semantic-search hits.

Client examples

python3 scripts/elicit.py GET /usage
python3 scripts/elicit.py POST /search/papers --body request.json --out papers.json
python3 scripts/elicit.py POST /sessions/reports --body report-request.json --out report-session.json
python3 scripts/elicit.py GET /sessions/reports/RETURNED_ID --out report-status.json

Search request example: {"query":"methods for reducing quantum resources in elliptic curve discrete logarithms","maxResults":10}.

For a full systematic review with screening, extraction and a report, follow the systematic review recipe (quota check and request template).

Read API notes for limits, failures, and advanced workflows. Inspect only the relevant operation with METHOD /path --schema. On first use the client downloads Elicit's public OpenAPI document to references/api-schema.json (not committed); later schema lookups stay offline. Verify current official docs and OpenAPI when the API rejects a documented request or a needed feature is absent. Do not guess fields or endpoints.

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.