AgentStack
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Extract Futureworks

skill-lari-uqac-researchtools-extract-futureworks · by LARi-UQAC

Future-works analysis skill with two modes. Mode audit: review one manuscript's own future-works / conclusion / limitations section (.tex/.md) — presence, testability, link to a stated limitation, and novelty against the literature — and emit flagged findings for the host agent's plan. Mode mine: extract the stated future works / open problems of a corpus from full text (download via download_pdf…

No reviews yet
0 installs
0 views
view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-lari-uqac-researchtools-extract-futureworks

✓ 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.

Are you the author of Extract Futureworks? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Future-works analysis (audit + corpus mining)

A reusable future-works capability invoked by the academic agents. It mirrors the extract-statistic skill: two modes, one input contract each, and a strict boundary — it produces findings, the host agent judges them through its own deliberation step. The full pipeline and flag catalogue live in [references/futureworks-protocol.md](references/futureworks-protocol.md); the heading cues used to locate the relevant passages live in [references/section-cues.md](references/section-cues.md). Read both before using this skill. This file is the entry point and contract.

When to use

  • Mode audit — a host auditor ([paper-auditor](../../agents/paper-auditor.md),

[scopus-auditor](../../agents/scopus-auditor.md), [thesis-auditor](../../agents/thesis-auditor.md), [thesis-proposal-auditor](../../agents/thesis-proposal-auditor.md)) reaches its future-works / hypothesis step. The skill audits the work's own stated future works and is then used to validate the work's hypotheses and to propose stronger ones drawn from the cited corpus.

  • Mode mine — [scopus-researcher](../../agents/scopus-researcher.md) has downloaded the

corpus full text and wants every paper's stated future works extracted and synthesized, so the gap map, the Pareto matrix, and the hypotheses target real, author-declared open problems for the next research project.

When NOT to use

  • As a standalone command typed by the user. The skill is invoked by the agents at their future-works

step, not directly. (It still runs if a user points it at a file, but its outputs feed a host pipeline.)

  • For broad ideation unanchored to a manuscript or a corpus.

Cross-review boundary (do not run deliberation here)

This skill does not run a deliberation panel and does not call gemini_reviewer.py or github_reviewer.py. The host agents already run the mandatory [deliberation](../deliberation/SKILL.md) step once on their near-final output; the findings produced here are merged into the host plan and critiqued there. This keeps one panel per run.

Modes

Mode audit — one manuscript's own future works

  • Input: a .tex or .md manuscript path. Resolve \input{}/\include{} recursively (up to 3

levels) and audit the merged document, exactly as the host auditors merge their input.

  • Pipeline (see the protocol reference): locate the future-works / conclusion / limitations

section -> presence check -> per-statement testability and specificity audit -> link-to-limitation audit -> novelty check against Scopus -> hypothesis cross-check (validate the work's stated hypotheses against the corpus future works and propose stronger ones).

  • Output:
  • _futurework_report.md next to the manuscript (or

futurework_report_.md in the working directory for pasted text).

  • A list of [FW …] flags the host folds into its plan (paper-auditor Section E, scopus-auditor

Section F1, thesis / thesis-proposal Section B).

  • Never modify the manuscript directly. Corrections are applied by the host plan / latex-writer.

Mode mine — corpus future works from full text

  • Input: a .bib (preferred) or an existing refs/ directory.
  • Steps:
  1. Ensure each retained paper's full text is present in any format - call

.claude/skills/scopus/scripts/download_pdf.py (presence-gated; PDF, then the HTML/Markdown any-format tiers).

  1. Parse every present file with scripts/extract_text.py (--section-scan on) to get the

future-work / conclusion / limitations excerpts per paper.

  1. Synthesize a corpus future-works table (one row per stated future-work item: paper,

statement, category, fit to the review theme/gap, effort 1-5, impact 1-5) and a research-opportunity list (recurring "X remains future work" across papers = high-value, author-declared gap). The host ranks the rows by a Pareto 80/20 score (lowest effort x highest impact first).

  • Presence-gated: a paper whose full text could not be retrieved (status pdf-missing)

contributes title/abstract-level future works only and is flagged [FW FULLTEXT-MISSING]; it never blocks the pipeline.

  • Output: _corpus_futurework.md (human-readable ranked table + opportunity list) and

_corpus_futurework.json (machine-readable, consumed by scopus-researcher). These route into scopus-researcher Step 9b (gap map), Step 9d (Pareto matrix), and Step 10 (hypotheses).

Prerequisites

  • A Markdown/PDF backend importable for parsing (Docling preferred, else pymupdf4llm + pymupdf, else

the HTML tag-strip) - see .claude/skills/extract-statistic/scripts/requirements.txt. A missing backend degrades to abstract-level future works and flags it.

  • For full-text retrieval in mine mode: .claude/skills/scopus/scripts/download_pdf.py reachable,

SCOPUS_API_KEY for the Elsevier source, and UNPAYWALL_EMAIL for the Unpaywall tier (the arXiv / PMC / Semantic Scholar tiers work without a key).

  • For novelty / hypothesis lookups during the audit: scopus_api.py reachable. A network error is

flagged [SCOPUS UNAVAILABLE] and the audit proceeds without references.

Invocation

# Mode audit (host auditor):
python ".claude/skills/extract-statistic/scripts/extract_text.py" text "" --section-scan
# then apply the pipeline in references/futureworks-protocol.md and write _futurework_report.md

# Mode mine (scopus-researcher / auditor cited-corpus mining):
python ".claude/skills/scopus/scripts/download_pdf.py" bib "" --latex ""
python ".claude/skills/extract-statistic/scripts/extract_text.py" bib "" --latex "" --section-scan
# then synthesize _corpus_futurework.md + .json

The parser (extract_text.py) is shared with extract-statistic; this skill reuses its --section-scan output rather than shipping its own script. Pass --stats-scan --section-scan together when an agent mines statistics and future works in the same pass.

Resources

  • references/futureworks-protocol.md - the audit + mine pipelines, the [FW …] flag catalogue, the

output format, and the Pareto ranking rule.

  • references/section-cues.md - the English and French heading cues used to locate the future-work /

conclusion / limitations / open-problems passages.

  • The shared parser .claude/skills/extract-statistic/scripts/extract_text.py (--section-scan); it

reuses download_pdf.py for any-format retrieval (it does not reimplement downloading).

Key rules

  • Respond in the manuscript's language (French if the manuscript is French, English if English).
  • Anti-AI-style hygiene follows .claude/skills/scientific-writing/references/writing_principles.md

(canonical): no em dashes, straight quotes only, no zero-width characters, no AI transition phrases, no overly perfect lists. Target an AI-style risk score below 10%.

  • Never fabricate a future-work statement or a hypothesis; if the source does not state it, mark it

missing.

  • Every proposed hypothesis must be testable by a named method and validated for novelty against

Scopus before it is offered (reuse the scopus_api.py search pattern).

  • The Pareto 80/20 ranking is the host's: this skill supplies the per-paper future-work rows; the host

scores effort vs impact and maps each row to the review's themes and gaps.

Source & license

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

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

Reviews

No reviews yet — be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.