SKILL verified Apache-2.0 Self-run

Self Review

Name: Self Review
Availability: InStock
Author: ARAVINDAN20

skill-aravindan20-claude-research-paper-os-self-review · by ARAVINDAN20

Automatically review an academic paper using the NeurIPS review form with three reviewer personas, ensemble scoring, and reflection refinement. Extracts text from PDF, runs structured review, and outputs actionable feedback. Use when the user wants to review a paper before submission or get feedback on a draft.

↗ Repository

— No reviews yet

0 installs

24 views

0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-aravindan20-claude-research-paper-os-self-review

✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

✓ Prompt-injection patterns
✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
✓ Untrusted network calls
✓ Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

✓ Network access No
✓ Filesystem access No
✓ Shell / process execution No
✓ Environment & secrets No
✓ Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

View the full security report →

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

Links to your public security report.

[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-aravindan20-claude-research-paper-os-self-review)

Reliability & compatibility

✓ Security review passed

0 installs to date

— no reviews yet

○ 5mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.

How agent discovery & health will work →

Are you the author of Self Review? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.

About

Self-Review

Review an academic paper using a structured review form with multiple reviewer personas.

Input

$ARGUMENTS — Path to PDF file or .tex file

Scripts

Extract text from PDF

python ~/.claude/skills/self-review/scripts/extract_pdf_text.py paper.pdf --output paper_text.txt
python ~/.claude/skills/self-review/scripts/extract_pdf_text.py paper.pdf --format markdown

Tries pymupdf4llm (best) → pymupdf → pypdf. Install: pip install pymupdf4llm pymupdf pypdf

Parse PDF into structured sections

python ~/.claude/skills/self-review/scripts/parse_pdf_sections.py \
  --pdf paper.pdf --output sections.json

Extracts title (via font size), section headings, and section text. Requires: pip install pymupdf Key flags: --format text, --verbose

Workflow

Step 1: Load Paper

If PDF: use extract_pdf_text.py to extract text
If .tex: read the LaTeX source directly

Step 2: Three-Persona Review

Run three independent reviews using different personas (from references/review-form.md):

Harsh but fair reviewer: Expects good experiments that lead to insights
Harsh and critical reviewer: Looking for impactful ideas in the field
Open-minded reviewer: Looking for novel ideas not proposed before

For each persona, generate a review following the NeurIPS review JSON format in references/review-form.md.

Step 3: Reflection Refinement (up to 3 rounds per reviewer)

After each review, apply the reflection prompt: re-evaluate accuracy and soundness, refine if needed. Stop when "I am done".

Step 4: Aggregate

Combine all three reviews
Average numerical scores (round to nearest integer)
Synthesize a meta-review finding consensus
Weight scores using AgentLaboratory weights: Overall (1.0), Contribution (0.4), Presentation (0.2), others (0.1 each)

Step 5: Actionable Report

Output format:

## Review Summary
- **Overall Score**: X/10 (Weighted: Y/10)
- **Decision**: Accept / Reject
- **Confidence**: Z/5

## Strengths (consensus across reviewers)
1. ...
2. ...

## Weaknesses (consensus across reviewers)
1. ...
2. ...

## Questions for Authors
1. ...

## Specific Suggestions for Improvement
1. [Section X, Page Y]: ...
2. [Section Z, Page W]: ...

## Score Breakdown
| Dimension | R1 | R2 | R3 | Avg |
|-----------|----|----|-----|-----|
| Overall | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| Contribution | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

References

NeurIPS review form, scoring weights, personas, reflection prompts: ~/.claude/skills/self-review/references/review-form.md
PDF text extraction: ~/.claude/skills/self-review/scripts/extract_pdf_text.py

Missing Sections Check

You MUST verify that all required sections are present: Abstract, Introduction, Methods/Approach, Experiments/Results, Discussion/Conclusion. Reduce scores if any are missing.

Related Skills

Upstream: [paper-compilation](../paper-compilation/)
Downstream: [paper-revision](../paper-revision/), [rebuttal-writing](../rebuttal-writing/)
See also: [slide-generation](../slide-generation/)

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Author: ARAVINDAN20
Source: ARAVINDAN20/Claude-Research-Paper-OS
License: Apache-2.0

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Write a review

Versions

v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.