# Literature Synthesis

> Use this skill when asked to synthesize, survey, or summarize a body of research papers on a topic. Produces a coherent narrative across multiple sources, identifying themes, consensus, contradictions, and open questions.

- Skill: `aviskaar/literature-synthesis` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add aviskaar/literature-synthesis`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/aviskaar/literature-synthesis/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Research & Search
- License: Apache-2.0
- Author: aviskaar (https://skillmd.com/u/aviskaar)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/aviskaar/literature-synthesis

---


# Literature Synthesis

Synthesize findings across a set of research papers into a coherent, structured overview.

## Process

### Step 1 — Scope
Clarify the exact research question or topic. If not provided, ask before proceeding.

### Step 2 — Organize Sources
Group papers by:
- Methodology (e.g., empirical vs. theoretical, supervised vs. unsupervised)
- Chronology (identify how the field evolved)
- Findings (consensus vs. conflicting results)

### Step 3 — Write the Synthesis

Structure the output as follows:

#### Background
One paragraph establishing why this topic matters and what preceded it.

#### Key Themes
For each major theme or line of work:
- Describe the approach
- Cite representative papers
- State what was established and what remains uncertain

#### Points of Consensus
What the field broadly agrees on, with supporting citations.

#### Open Debates
Where papers meaningfully contradict each other — describe each position fairly.

#### Open Problems
Research questions that remain unanswered or underexplored.

#### Synthesis Conclusion
A 2–3 sentence takeaway: what the body of work tells us and what the most promising next step is.

## Citation Style

Use inline parenthetical citations: (Author et al., Year). List full references at the end.

## Tone

Write as a neutral analyst, not an advocate. Present conflicting views without taking sides unless the evidence is overwhelming.