Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
From science-skill
Guides section-by-section review of scientific papers from PDF/LaTeX, converting PDF to LaTeX, logging issues, verifying math/figures/citations, and generating structured responses.
npx claudepluginhub caidish/cai-tools --plugin science-skillHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/science-skill:paper-review-helperThis skill is limited to the following tools:
The summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Guide user through structured paper review, logging issues and generating formal review response.
Reviews existing scientific manuscripts (.tex/.typ/.md) with location-anchored comments and user-approved edits. Verifies references and factual claims.
Academic writing multi-agent orchestrator. TRIGGER when: user is editing .tex files, reviewing thesis/paper chapters, drafting academic content, checking writing quality, or analyzing research positioning. Coordinates specialist agents in parallel for review, research, drafting, polishing, figure work, bibliography auditing, and literature surveys.
Use this skill for "review this paper", "review this manuscript", "peer review", "review my paper", "critique this manuscript", "review this submission", "give me feedback on my paper", "check my methods", "review my statistics", "review as a peer reviewer", "evaluate this manuscript", "review this PDF", or mentions manuscript review, peer review, paper critique, or methodological review.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Guide user through structured paper review, logging issues and generating formal review response.
Locate paper from $ARGUMENTS:
<paper-name>-review/ folder, copy PDF into it.tex first (prioritize over PDF)AskUserQuestion: "No paper detected. Please provide path to paper."Convert PDF → LaTeX (if no .tex exists):
# Check credentials
[ -n "$MATHPIX_APP_ID" ] && [ -n "$MATHPIX_API_KEY" ] && echo "OK" || echo "MISSING"
python ~/.claude/plugins/science-skill/skills/paper-review-helper/scripts/pdf2tex.py "<pdf_path>" "<paper-folder>"
Output structure: <paper-folder>/<pdf_id>/<pdf_id>.tex with images/ subfolder for figures.
Initialize workspace:
<paper-folder>/
├── <pdf_id>/ # Mathpix output (if converted)
│ ├── <pdf_id>.tex # Converted LaTeX
│ └── images/ # Extracted figures
├── artifact/
│ ├── review-log.md # Conversation log
│ ├── issues-major.md # Major issues
│ ├── issues-minor.md # Minor issues
│ └── programs/ # Math verification scripts
└── original.pdf # Source PDF (if applicable)
Parse LaTeX structure: \section, \subsection, \begin{abstract}. For each section:
Chunk appropriately:
\subsection or paragraph groupsPresent section with:
[Figure X: images/<filename> - <caption>] with a path link to the file in the workspace.Ask user via AskUserQuestion:
Respond to requests:
WebSearch for DOI, author names, paper titlesWebSearch, WebFetch for conceptsartifact/programs/, run with Python/SymPyimages/ folder, describe or use /vision skillLog to artifact/review-log.md:
## [Section Name] - [Timestamp]
### User Questions
- Q: ...
- A: ...
### Issues Identified
- [MAJOR] ...
- [MINOR] ...
### Tools Used
- WebSearch: "query" → finding
issues-major.md: methodology flaws, unsupported claims, logical errorsissues-minor.md: grammar, typos, unclear wordingSkip Supplementary/Appendix unless user requests.
Gather context via AskUserQuestion:
Generate review to artifact/REVIEW.md:
# Review of [Paper Title]
## Summary
[1-2 sentences]
## Overall Recommendation
[User's decision + justification]
## Major Issues
1. **Issue**: [description]
- **Location**: Section X, paragraph Y / Equation N
- **Impact**: [why this matters]
- **Suggestion**: [fix or note if unfixable]
## Minor Issues
[Grouped by type: grammar, clarity, formatting]
## User Misunderstandings Analysis
[If user had confusion during review:]
- **Confusion**: [what]
- **Cause**: paper vagueness / reader knowledge gap
- **Recommendation**: [should paper clarify?]
## Constructive Feedback
[Positives + specific improvements]
## Editor Questions Response
[If provided]
Inline markers when presenting text:
[G: ...] - grammar error[C: ...] - clarity issue[?] - ambiguous/unsupported claim[REF?] - missing or questionable citation[EQ?] - equation to verify