related-work-writing
Skill9 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Write Related Work sections that compare and contrast prior work with your approach. Organize by theme, cite broadly, and explain how your work differs. Use when writing or improving the Related Work section of a paper.
4 other projects use a version of this, 3 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- acprk/crypto-research-agentstheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- willlee1995/skillsedited, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- dongzhigang13305312738-art/paper-skillsedited, first seen Jul 21, 2026
- lingzhi227/agent-research-skillsedited, first seen Feb 20, 2026
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 3
- lingzhi227/agent-research-skills★ 35094% same
- dongzhigang13305312738-art/paper-skills★ 194% same
- willlee1995/skills★ 194% same
Wrote their own version · 1
- acprk/crypto-research-agents★ 15same 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 repository164 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .codex/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- agents/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- claude-md/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- hooks/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- insight-architectSkill
- agent-teamsSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- claim-decomposerSkill
- context-engineeringSkill
- dispatcherSkill
- git-worktreesSkill
- hd-mavp-routerSkill
- mentor-modeSkill
- reference-registrySkill
- routing-policySkill
- skill-self-updateSkill
- tdd-workflowSkill
- ab-testSkill
- academic-researchSkill
- advanced-methodology-extensionsSkill
- agent-governanceSkill
- ai-hyp-gateSkill
- algorithm-designSkill
- analystSkill
- archcode-genomicsSkill
- arm-cortex-microcontrollersSkill
- atomizeSkill
- backward-traceabilitySkill
- boyko-constraint-engineSkill
- boyko-epistemic-auditSkill
- boyko-goal-expansion-100Skill
- boyko-knowledge-architectureSkill
- boyko-leverage-mapSkill
- boyko-methodSkill
- boyko-preflightSkill
- boyko-project-radarSkill
- boyko-rippleSkill
- boyko-scientific-consortiumSkill
- boyko-specialistSkill
- boyko-toolcheckSkill
- boyko-triangle-auditSkill
- boyko-why-ladderSkill
- browser-actSkill
- build-autoSkill
- c4-architectureSkill
- career-prepSkill
- changelog-genSkill
- citation-managementSkill
- code-debuggingSkill
- code-materialitySkill
- codex-skepticSkill
- codex-solverSkill
- codex-tracySkill
- combinatorial-creativitySkill
- common-groundSkill
- conductorSkill
- consilienceSkill
- construct-measurement-gateSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 3 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
3
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Common: line 24
Read the current paper draft (especially Methods and Introduction)
- Common: line 42
Ensure every cited paper has a clear reason for inclusion
- Common: line 43
Check that your work's novelty is clear from the comparisons
- Very specific: line 44
Verify all \cite{} keys exist in the .bib file
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Related Work Writing
Generate publication-quality Related Work sections with proper citations and thematic organization.
Input
$0— Current paper draft or method description$1— Collected literature (BibTeX entries, paper summaries, or literature review notes)
References
- Related work writing prompts and strategies:
~/.claude/skills/related-work-writing/references/related-work-prompts.md
Workflow
Step 1: Analyze the Paper's Contributions
- Read the current paper draft (especially Methods and Introduction)
- Identify the key contributions and novelty claims
- List the technical components that need literature context
Step 2: Organize Literature by Theme
Group related papers into thematic clusters:
- Each cluster should represent a research direction or technique
- Common themes: problem formulation, methodology family, application domain, evaluation approach
- Order themes from most to least relevant to your work
Step 3: Write Each Theme Paragraph
For each thematic group:
- Topic sentence — Introduce the research direction
- Describe key works — Summarize 2-5 representative papers
- Compare and contrast — How does each approach differ from yours?
- Transition — Connect to the next theme or to your contribution
Step 4: Refine
- Ensure every cited paper has a clear reason for inclusion
- Check that your work's novelty is clear from the comparisons
- Verify all
\cite{}keys exist in the.bibfile - Aim for 1-2 pages (single column) or 0.5-1 page (double column)
Rules
- Compare and contrast, don't just describe — "Unlike [X] which assumes..., our method..."
- Organize by theme, not chronologically — Group by research direction
- Cite broadly — Not just the most popular papers; include recent and diverse work
- Be fair — Acknowledge strengths of prior work before stating limitations
- Explain inapplicability — If a method could apply to your setting, explain why you don't compare experimentally, or add it to experiments
- Use present tense for established facts — "Smith et al. propose..." or "This approach uses..."
- End with positioning — The final paragraph should clearly position your work relative to all discussed prior work
Related Skills
- Upstream: literature-review, citation-management
- See also: survey-generation
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.

