Purpose
Analyze user-provided papers and reports before final method selection.
This skill checks whether the user has placed original paper files under workspace/papers/, reads those originals, and extracts transferable method cues, assumptions, variables, validation ideas, and limitations for the current subquestions.
This skill does not fabricate references, browse for new papers, write the final method card, or copy a published model blindly.
When to use
Use this skill:
- After
problem-parser and problem-classifier have produced validated artifacts.
- Before
method-selector.
- When the team wants to ground method selection in user-supplied literature rather than guessing from model names.
- When original papers, reports, or extracted paper text are available under
workspace/papers/.
Preconditions
The following should already exist or be provided:
- A validated problem parse.
- A validated problem classification artifact.
- At least one original paper file under
workspace/papers/.
If no paper originals are present under workspace/papers/, stop and remind the user to place them there before analysis begins.
Inputs
Use or request:
workspace/problem/problem-parser/problem_parse.json, if available.
workspace/problem/problem-classifier/problem_classification.json, if available.
- Original paper files under
workspace/papers/.
- User notes about which papers matter most, if available.
Workflow
Check workspace/papers/ first.
- Look for user-supplied paper originals or extracted paper text.
- Accept formats such as
.pdf, .docx, .md, .txt, or clearly named extracted text files.
- Ignore
workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md if it already exists.
Stop early if the paper folder is empty.
- If no paper originals are found, tell the user to place the paper originals under
workspace/papers/.
- Do not fabricate literature summaries from memory.
Inventory the available papers.
- Record file name, apparent title if recoverable, likely language, and likely relevance.
- Mark unreadable or weakly relevant files explicitly.
Read papers for modeling signals.
- Extract task type, assumptions, variables, data requirements, method families, outputs, validation patterns, and limitations.
- Focus on transferable ideas rather than copying a complete published pipeline.
Map literature cues to the current problem.
- Link relevant papers to specific subquestions such as
Q1, Q2, or Q3.
- Distinguish useful method cues from paper-specific tricks that should not be copied directly.
Summarize risks and reuse boundaries.
- Flag assumptions that may not fit the current contest problem.
- Flag data requirements that the current workspace may not satisfy.
- Flag methods that look impressive in papers but may be infeasible under contest constraints.
Write the literature analysis report.
- Save the report as
workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md.
- Keep it concise, traceable, and ready for
method-selector.
Hand off to method-selector.
- Pass forward the paper inventory, method cues, cautions, and unresolved evidence gaps.
Outputs
Produce one Markdown literature-analysis artifact:
workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md
The report should include:
- reviewed paper inventory
- per-paper summary
- subquestion-to-paper mapping
- transferable method cues
- assumptions or limitations worth carrying forward
- methods that should not be copied blindly
- missing evidence or unresolved questions
- recommended next skill
Output format
Write a Markdown report at workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md.
Suggested sections:
- Reviewed papers
- Transferable method cues by subquestion
- Useful assumptions, variables, and validation ideas
- Risks of direct reuse
- Missing evidence
- Recommended next skill
Rules
- Analyze only user-supplied papers or extracted paper text under
workspace/papers/.
- Do not fabricate titles, authors, years, venues, DOIs, or conclusions.
- Do not browse for new literature inside this skill.
- Do not turn literature analysis into final method selection.
- Do not override the validated problem parse or classification.
- Do not copy a paper's model blindly without checking fit to the current subquestion, data, and contest constraints.
- Do not skip the initial check for paper originals in
workspace/papers/.
Verification
Before handoff, verify:
workspace/papers/ was checked for user-supplied paper originals.
- At least one paper file was found, or a clear blocker was reported.
- Each relevant subquestion has mapped paper cues or an explicit note that no relevant paper was found.
- Transferable ideas are separated from risky direct reuse.
- The report is saved at
workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md.
- The next skill is
method-selector.
Failure modes
Stop and report a blocker if:
workspace/papers/ contains no paper originals.
- All paper files are unreadable or corrupted.
- The files are too incomplete to identify any reusable method cues.
- The user asks for method selection or paper claims before literature analysis is available.
Stop conditions
This skill must stop instead of guessing when:
- No original papers are available under
workspace/papers/.
- File contents are too incomplete to support a trustworthy summary.
- Continuing would require inventing references, assumptions, or paper conclusions.
When stopping, output:
- the blocker
- why it matters
- the checked folder path
- readable files found, if any
- missing paper files or missing readable text
- recommended next action
Handoff
After producing workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md, hand off to:
method-selector
The handoff should include:
- report path
- reviewed paper list
- per-subquestion literature cues
- reusable method families
- risky assumptions or direct-copy risks
- validation or robustness ideas worth carrying forward
- unresolved evidence gaps
Examples
Example 1: Papers missing
Input state:
- Problem parse and classification exist.
workspace/papers/ contains no original paper files.
Output:
Blocker: no user-supplied paper originals were found under `workspace/papers/`.
Why it matters: this skill is designed to analyze original paper artifacts, not fabricate literature notes from memory.
Recommended next action: place the relevant paper originals or extracted paper text under `workspace/papers/`, then run `related-paper-analyzer` again.
Example 2: Papers available
Input state:
- Problem parse and classification exist.
workspace/papers/ contains several relevant PDF papers.
Output:
workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md
The report summarizes:
- which papers are relevant to
Q1, Q2, and Q3
- which method families appear reusable
- which assumptions look risky under current contest data constraints
- which validation ideas should be passed to
method-selector
1---2name: related-paper-analyzer3description: Collect and analyze relevant papers, reports, and reference methods to inform method selection without fabricating references or copying models blindly.4license: MIT5---67# Purpose89Analyze user-provided papers and reports before final method selection.1011This skill checks whether the user has placed original paper files under `workspace/papers/`, reads those originals, and extracts transferable method cues, assumptions, variables, validation ideas, and limitations for the current subquestions.1213This skill does not fabricate references, browse for new papers, write the final method card, or copy a published model blindly.1415# When to use1617Use this skill:1819- After `problem-parser` and `problem-classifier` have produced validated artifacts.20- Before `method-selector`.21- When the team wants to ground method selection in user-supplied literature rather than guessing from model names.22- When original papers, reports, or extracted paper text are available under `workspace/papers/`.2324# Preconditions2526The following should already exist or be provided:2728- A validated problem parse.29- A validated problem classification artifact.30- At least one original paper file under `workspace/papers/`.3132If no paper originals are present under `workspace/papers/`, stop and remind the user to place them there before analysis begins.3334# Inputs3536Use or request:3738- `workspace/problem/problem-parser/problem_parse.json`, if available.39- `workspace/problem/problem-classifier/problem_classification.json`, if available.40- Original paper files under `workspace/papers/`.41- User notes about which papers matter most, if available.4243# Workflow44451. Check `workspace/papers/` first.46 - Look for user-supplied paper originals or extracted paper text.47 - Accept formats such as `.pdf`, `.docx`, `.md`, `.txt`, or clearly named extracted text files.48 - Ignore `workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md` if it already exists.49502. Stop early if the paper folder is empty.51 - If no paper originals are found, tell the user to place the paper originals under `workspace/papers/`.52 - Do not fabricate literature summaries from memory.53543. Inventory the available papers.55 - Record file name, apparent title if recoverable, likely language, and likely relevance.56 - Mark unreadable or weakly relevant files explicitly.57584. Read papers for modeling signals.59 - Extract task type, assumptions, variables, data requirements, method families, outputs, validation patterns, and limitations.60 - Focus on transferable ideas rather than copying a complete published pipeline.61625. Map literature cues to the current problem.63 - Link relevant papers to specific subquestions such as `Q1`, `Q2`, or `Q3`.64 - Distinguish useful method cues from paper-specific tricks that should not be copied directly.65666. Summarize risks and reuse boundaries.67 - Flag assumptions that may not fit the current contest problem.68 - Flag data requirements that the current workspace may not satisfy.69 - Flag methods that look impressive in papers but may be infeasible under contest constraints.70717. Write the literature analysis report.72 - Save the report as `workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md`.73 - Keep it concise, traceable, and ready for `method-selector`.74758. Hand off to `method-selector`.76 - Pass forward the paper inventory, method cues, cautions, and unresolved evidence gaps.7778# Outputs7980Produce one Markdown literature-analysis artifact:8182- `workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md`8384The report should include:8586- reviewed paper inventory87- per-paper summary88- subquestion-to-paper mapping89- transferable method cues90- assumptions or limitations worth carrying forward91- methods that should not be copied blindly92- missing evidence or unresolved questions93- recommended next skill9495# Output format9697Write a Markdown report at `workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md`.9899Suggested sections:100101- Reviewed papers102- Transferable method cues by subquestion103- Useful assumptions, variables, and validation ideas104- Risks of direct reuse105- Missing evidence106- Recommended next skill107108# Rules109110- Analyze only user-supplied papers or extracted paper text under `workspace/papers/`.111- Do not fabricate titles, authors, years, venues, DOIs, or conclusions.112- Do not browse for new literature inside this skill.113- Do not turn literature analysis into final method selection.114- Do not override the validated problem parse or classification.115- Do not copy a paper's model blindly without checking fit to the current subquestion, data, and contest constraints.116- Do not skip the initial check for paper originals in `workspace/papers/`.117118# Verification119120Before handoff, verify:121122- `workspace/papers/` was checked for user-supplied paper originals.123- At least one paper file was found, or a clear blocker was reported.124- Each relevant subquestion has mapped paper cues or an explicit note that no relevant paper was found.125- Transferable ideas are separated from risky direct reuse.126- The report is saved at `workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md`.127- The next skill is `method-selector`.128129# Failure modes130131Stop and report a blocker if:132133- `workspace/papers/` contains no paper originals.134- All paper files are unreadable or corrupted.135- The files are too incomplete to identify any reusable method cues.136- The user asks for method selection or paper claims before literature analysis is available.137138# Stop conditions139140This skill must stop instead of guessing when:141142- No original papers are available under `workspace/papers/`.143- File contents are too incomplete to support a trustworthy summary.144- Continuing would require inventing references, assumptions, or paper conclusions.145146When stopping, output:147148- the blocker149- why it matters150- the checked folder path151- readable files found, if any152- missing paper files or missing readable text153- recommended next action154155# Handoff156157After producing `workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md`, hand off to:158159`method-selector`160161The handoff should include:162163- report path164- reviewed paper list165- per-subquestion literature cues166- reusable method families167- risky assumptions or direct-copy risks168- validation or robustness ideas worth carrying forward169- unresolved evidence gaps170171# Examples172173## Example 1: Papers missing174175Input state:176177- Problem parse and classification exist.178- `workspace/papers/` contains no original paper files.179180Output:181182```markdown183Blocker: no user-supplied paper originals were found under `workspace/papers/`.184185Why it matters: this skill is designed to analyze original paper artifacts, not fabricate literature notes from memory.186187Recommended next action: place the relevant paper originals or extracted paper text under `workspace/papers/`, then run `related-paper-analyzer` again.188```189190## Example 2: Papers available191192Input state:193194- Problem parse and classification exist.195- `workspace/papers/` contains several relevant PDF papers.196197Output:198199- `workspace/papers/related_paper_analysis.md`200201The report summarizes:202203- which papers are relevant to `Q1`, `Q2`, and `Q3`204- which method families appear reusable205- which assumptions look risky under current contest data constraints206- which validation ideas should be passed to `method-selector`