related-work-survey
From the author
Conducts a systematic related-work / literature-survey / state-of-the-art review for a research question by defining survey dimensions, searching each axis, building a taxonomy of prior work, identifying the gap, and producing a positioning narrative for a paper's Related Work section. Goes beyond a flat paper list to deliver structured analysis. Use when the user is starting a new research project and needs to map the landscape, asks "what's been done on X?" or "how does my idea compare to existing work?", needs to write or revise a Related Work / Background / Prior Art section, wants to identify a research gap or position their contribution, or asks to build a taxonomy of approaches in a research area.
Install
npx skills add jxtse/scientific-research-skills --skill related-work-survey -a claude-code
Installs to .claude/skills/related-work-survey/ · Each command fetches the skill straight from GitHub with the open skills CLI.
Byte-identical to the scanned commit, with the repository’s licence and a SOURCE.txt.
Want your agent to suggest skills while you type? See how to use skills from your IDE.
Safety checks on SKILL.md
No warnings.
Why 78
aiqbench computes the trust score from public signals. It is not a security audit, so read a skill before you install it.
Similar skills
Closest to this one by what they do and when they are used.
- literature-researchfcakyon/phd-skillsUse when the user wants to find related work, survey a research area, identify literature gaps, or discover open-source implementations. Triggers on phrases like "find papers on", "related work", "literature review", "what papers exist", "open source implementation", or "papers with code".Science★ 433
- ase-task-researchrse/aseResearch a topic in depth for the current or given task plan, by combining Internet/Web search with a grounding in the source artifacts of the project, and append the resulting research report to the "research" attachment of the task, optionally refining the plan by its recommendations. Use when the user wants to "research", "investigate", or "look into" a topic for a "task" or "plan".Science★ 60
- research-with-sourcesinkeep/open-knowledgeInvestigate a topic against preserved sources and write a draft-status research article under `research/` in a Knowledge Base project (the `knowledge-base` starter pack). Read when asked to research a topic, compare options, synthesize sources, gather evidence, or extend an existing research doc. Carries the full procedure: scan existing coverage, agree a research rubric, capture every source verbatim before analyzing, write the article incrementally so a crash never loses work, cite every claim, and link it back into the graph. Does not promote findings to canonical knowledge — that is the sibling `consolidate-notes` skill, after a decision lands.Science★ 4.7K
- literature-reviewaipoch/open-scienceFind, verify, and synthesize scientific literature — from "what's the seminal paper for X" through full multi-source reviews. Covers grounding claims in real retrieved sources, avoiding fabricated citations, handling retractions, and calibrating confidence to evidence strength.Engineering★ 5.4K
- lit-reviewpedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflowStructured literature search + synthesis with citation extraction, thematic clustering, and gap identification. Use when user says "find papers on X", "do a lit review", "what's the literature on...", "summarize what we know about...", "where's the gap in this field", "review recent work on Y". Produces a written review with BibTeX-ready citations. Uses WebSearch/WebFetch for recent work.Engineering★ 1.7K
- literature-surveygaasher/Agent-Loop-SkillsUse when the user wants a structured, saturating literature survey on a question — not a one-shot summary, but an evidence/contradiction matrix (sources × claims) built by iterative search until coverage stops growing. Each round expands the search (new sub-topic queries plus citation-graph walks), admits new sources, extracts their claims with verbatim snippets, and records where every source stands on each claim (supports / contradicts / qualifies); the feedback signal is how many new matrix-changing sources a round adds, and it stops at saturation, patience, or budget. The output is the matrix plus a synthesis of consensus, disputes, and gaps, every cell backed by a real citation. Not for grading a written proposal against the literature (that is a proposal-evaluation task) and not for generating new hypotheses — this maps what the literature already says.Writing★ 177
Ratings & reviews
—
no reviews
Tried this skill? Rate it to help others. Sign in
Discussion
Join the discussion. Sign in