Literature Review

Literature Review

What This Does

Conducts a structured review of academic papers, technical documentation, RFCs, and industry publications on a given topic. Evaluates source quality, identifies key themes and debates, and produces a synthesis document suitable for informing technical decisions or establishing prior art.

Instructions

1. Define the review scope. Clarify with the user:

   • Topic and specific research questions
   • Type of literature: academic papers, RFCs, technical blogs, whitepapers, or all
   • Time range: recent only (last 2 years) or comprehensive
   • Depth: survey (breadth-first) or focused (depth-first on a specific question)

2. Search for sources. Use available tools to find relevant literature:

   • Web search for papers, articles, and technical posts
   • GitHub for implementations, benchmarks, and discussions
   • Official documentation and specifications
   • Conference proceedings and talk transcripts

3. Screen and select sources. Apply inclusion/exclusion criteria:

   • Relevance to the research question
   • Source credibility (peer review, author expertise, publication venue)
   • Recency and continued relevance
   • Aim for 10-20 sources for a survey, 5-10 for a focused review

4. Extract key information. For each source, note:

   • Core claim or contribution
   • Methodology or approach
   • Key findings or recommendations
   • Limitations acknowledged by the authors
   • How it relates to other sources in the review

5. Identify themes and patterns. Group findings into:

   • Areas of consensus (what most sources agree on)
   • Active debates (where sources disagree)
   • Emerging trends (recent shifts in thinking)
   • Gaps (questions that lack good coverage)

6. Synthesize into a review document. Write a coherent narrative that connects the sources rather than just listing them.

Output Format

# Literature Review: {Topic}
**Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Scope:** {survey/focused} | {time range} | {source types}
**Sources reviewed:** {count}

## Research Question(s)
1. {Primary question}
2. {Secondary question, if any}

## Summary of Findings
{3-5 sentence synthesis of the most important findings}

## Themes

### {Theme 1: Area of Consensus}
{Narrative synthesis with inline citations [Author, Year]}

### {Theme 2: Active Debate}
{Present competing perspectives with citations}

### {Theme 3: Emerging Trend}
{Describe the trend with evidence}

## Key Sources

| Source | Type | Year | Relevance | Key Contribution |
|--------|------|------|-----------|-----------------|
| {title} | {paper/RFC/blog/doc} | {year} | {H/M} | {one-line summary} |

## Gaps in the Literature
- {Gap 1: question that lacks good coverage}
- {Gap 2: area needing more research}

## Implications for {Project/Decision}
{How these findings should inform the user's work}

## References
1. {Author}. "{Title}." {Venue/URL}, {Year}.
2. ...

Tips

• A literature review synthesizes — it does not just list sources
• Group by theme, not by source. The narrative should flow logically.
• Always note limitations and biases in the sources
• For technology topics, prioritize recent sources — the field moves fast
• If a seminal older paper is foundational, include it regardless of age
• Distinguish between evidence (data, benchmarks) and opinion (blog posts, tweets)
• If you cannot find enough quality sources, say so — a gap finding is still a finding