Literature Reading And Synthesis

Literature Reading And Synthesis

Purpose

Help users read scientific papers actively, extract claims and evidence without flattening them, maintain a sustainable literature-tracking routine, and turn notes into synthesis artifacts.

Use this skill when

• First classify the requested work: continue only when the user needs renewed reading, evidence extraction, comparison, or synthesis of literature sources.
• The user needs a reading plan for one or more papers.
• The user asks how to unpack figures, tables, methods, claims, or limitations.
• The user wants a synthesis matrix, comparison table, or reusable note template.
• The user is setting up or debugging a literature-alert or reading queue.
• The user needs presentation, journal-club, or project-decision readiness from papers.

Do not use this skill when

• A completed literature review is only an input to downstream plan, code, pipeline, manuscript, or documentation updates.
• Relevant papers are only supporting evidence for a computational-analysis, pipeline, model-architecture, fine-tuning, or implementation strategy.
• The task is to trace dataset URLs, downloads, schemas, or pipeline provenance without interpreting the scientific literature.
• The user only asks for a factual summary of one paper and does not need a method.
• The task is mainly manuscript drafting, grant writing, or peer review rather than reading/synthesis.
• The request is citation formatting or citation-manager mechanics.

Core workflow

1. Reassess the current user request independently on every turn. Continue only when renewed literature reading or a literature-native synthesis artifact is the primary deliverable; prior paper use or source consultation supporting a technical decision does not retain this workflow.
2. Clarify the goal: orient, skim, present, compare, decide, track, or synthesize.
3. Route to the right playbook: paper reading, claim extraction, literature tracking, or synthesis matrices.
4. Pick the appropriate depth: quick triage, targeted section read, figure/evidence read, or high-stakes deep read.
5. Separate motivation, approach, results, interpretation, limitations, and next steps.
6. For figures and tables, decode the evidence before writing the take-home.
7. Convert the read into a concrete output: reading plan, extraction table, figure note, tracking queue, or synthesis matrix.
8. State caveats when advice is about habit design, dated source lists, or unsupported citation-manager mechanics.

Output formats

• Reading-depth plan.
• Six-question paper note.
• Figure/table unpacking note.
• Claim and evidence extraction table.
• Literature alert portfolio.
• Weekly literature triage queue.
• Synthesis matrix.
• Build-on-it note with next research action.

Reference routing

• Open references/paper-reading-workflow.md for reading goals, article-type routing, section intent, deep-read passes, and presentation readiness.
• Open references/claim-extraction.md for six-question extraction, figure/table unpacking, claim appraisal, and critique discipline.
• Open references/literature-tracking.md for alert streams, source portfolios, query tuning, weekly triage, and backlog pruning.
• Open references/synthesis-matrices.md for matrix fields, field-source maps, build-on-it notes, and comparison outputs.
• Use checklists for quick execution once the relevant reference route is clear.
• Use examples when the user asks for a template, worked pattern, or concrete artifact.

Quick checklist

• What is the user's reading goal and deadline?
• Is this quick triage, targeted reading, or high-stakes deep reading?
• What article type is it?
• Which claims, figures, methods, limitations, and next steps must be separated?
• Does the output need a paper note, figure note, tracking queue, or synthesis matrix?
• Are citation-manager mechanics being requested without source-backed guidance?

Common pitfalls

• Reading every paper at the same depth.
• Copying the abstract instead of extracting claims and evidence.
• Accepting figure take-homes before decoding the display.
• Treating publication as proof.
• Building an alert stream too large to process.
• Turning a synthesis matrix into a miscellaneous notes field.

Quality bar

• The answer must name the reading/tracking goal and choose a matching depth.
• Claims, evidence, interpretation, limitations, and next actions must be distinct.
• Figure and table advice must include concrete evidence-decoding steps.
• Literature tracking advice must be sustainable and volume-aware.
• Outputs must be reusable by the user after the conversation.