Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →AI-assisted paper reading, PDF Q&A, and summarization workflows
.claude/skills/brycewang-stanford-paper-reading-assistant/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 60% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 75% | 0% |
| case-14 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 91% | 0% |
| case-11 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | 52% | 0% |
| case-22 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | 72% | 0% |
Systematic workflows for reading, annotating, and extracting insights from academic papers, including AI-assisted summarization and critical analysis techniques.
Srinivasan Keshav's three-pass approach provides a structured way to read papers at increasing depth:
Read only:
After Pass 1, you should know:
Decision: Stop here if the paper is not relevant, or continue to Pass 2.
Read the full paper, but skip proofs and complex derivations:
After Pass 2, you should be able to:
For papers you need to deeply understand:
Use a consistent template for every paper you read:
markdown# Paper Notes: [Short Title] ## Metadata - **Title**: Full title - **Authors**: First Author et al. (Year) - **Venue**: Conference/Journal - **DOI/URL**: link - **Date read**: YYYY-MM-DD ## Summary (2-3 sentences) What does this paper do, and what are the main findings? ## Problem What problem does this paper address? Why is it important? ## Method How do they approach the problem? Key technical details. ## Key Results - Result 1: ... - Result 2: ... - Result 3: ... ## Strengths - Strength 1: ... - Strength 2: ... ## Weaknesses / Limitations - Weakness 1: ... - Weakness 2: ... ## Questions / Things I Don't Understand - Question 1: ... ## Relevance to My Work How does this connect to my research? What can I use? ## Key References to Follow Up - [Author, Year] - Why it seems relevant
Use structured prompts to extract specific information from papers:
python# Prompt template for paper summarization summarize_prompt = """Read the following academic paper and provide: 1. ONE-SENTENCE SUMMARY: The core contribution in a single sentence. 2. KEY FINDINGS (3-5 bullet points): - Finding 1 with specific numbers/results - Finding 2 ... 3. METHODOLOGY: Describe the approach in 2-3 sentences. 4. LIMITATIONS: List 2-3 limitations acknowledged or unacknowledged. 5. RELEVANCE: How does this relate to [your research topic]? Paper text: {paper_text} """ # Prompt for critical analysis critique_prompt = """Analyze the following paper critically: 1. VALIDITY: Are the experimental design and statistical analyses sound? Identify any threats to internal/external validity. 2. NOVELTY: What is genuinely new? What is incremental? 3. REPRODUCIBILITY: Could you replicate this study from the description given? What information is missing? 4. ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS: Are there alternative interpretations of the results that the authors do not consider? 5. FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS: What would you want to investigate next? Paper text: {paper_text} """
pythonimport fitz # PyMuPDF def extract_paper_text(pdf_path): """Extract structured text from an academic paper PDF.""" doc = fitz.open(pdf_path) sections = [] current_section = {"heading": "Preamble", "text": ""} for page_num, page in enumerate(doc): blocks = page.get_text("dict")["blocks"] for block in blocks: if "lines" not in block: continue for line in block["lines"]: text = "".join(span["text"] for span in line["spans"]) font_size = max(span["size"] for span in line["spans"]) is_bold = any("Bold" in span.get("font", "") for span in line["spans"]) # Heuristic: detect section headings if is_bold and font_size > 11 and len(text.strip()) < 80: if current_section["text"].strip(): sections.append(current_section) current_section = {"heading": text.strip(), "text": ""} else: current_section["text"] += text + " " if current_section["text"].strip(): sections.append(current_section) doc.close() return sections # Extract and display sections = extract_paper_text("paper.pdf") for s in sections: print(f"\n## {s['heading']}") print(s['text'][:200] + "...")
pythonimport os import json def process_paper_batch(pdf_dir, output_file): """Process a batch of papers and save structured notes.""" results = [] for filename in os.listdir(pdf_dir): if not filename.endswith(".pdf"): continue pdf_path = os.path.join(pdf_dir, filename) sections = extract_paper_text(pdf_path) # Find title (usually first bold text or first line) title = sections[0]["heading"] if sections else filename # Find abstract abstract = "" for s in sections: if "abstract" in s["heading"].lower(): abstract = s["text"].strip() break results.append({ "filename": filename, "title": title, "abstract": abstract, "num_sections": len(sections), "total_chars": sum(len(s["text"]) for s in sections) }) with open(output_file, "w") as f: json.dump(results, f, indent=2) return results
| Tool | Platform | Highlights | PDF Annotation | AI Features | Collaboration | |------|----------|-----------|---------------|-------------|---------------| | Zotero + ZotFile | All | Reference management + PDF | Yes | No (plugins available) | Group libraries | | Paperpile | Web/Chrome | Google Docs integration | Yes | No | Shared folders | | ReadCube Papers | All | Smart citations | Yes | Recommendations | Shared libraries | | Semantic Reader | Web | AI-augmented reading | Yes | Inline explanations, TLDRs | No | | Elicit | Web | AI paper search | No | Automated extraction | Tables | | Scholarcy | Web | Flashcard summaries | Yes | Auto-summarization | No |
| Paper Type | Focus On | Time Budget | |-----------|----------|-------------| | Seminal paper | Full three-pass reading, understand every detail | 3-4 hours | | Survey/review | Section headings, taxonomy, open questions | 1-2 hours | | Methods paper | Algorithm/procedure sections, pseudocode, evaluation | 1-2 hours | | Results paper | Figures, tables, statistical tests, effect sizes | 30-60 min | | Position paper | Arguments, assumptions, counterarguments | 30-60 min | | Related work (peripheral) | Abstract + conclusion only (Pass 1) | 5-10 min |
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-04 | fail→pass | 17,029 | 11,726 | -31% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,500 | 3,999 | +60% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 10,178 | 20,070 | +97% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,478 | 3,872 | +162% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | pass→pass | 38,062 | 28,142 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 6,467 | 6,889 | +7% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | pass→pass | 17,573 | 20,273 | +15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,833 | 5,049 | +78% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 10,687 | 9,833 | -8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,932 | 3,835 | +98% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 16,152 | 28,778 | +78% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,520 | 4,415 | +75% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 18,244 | 17,755 | -3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,774 | 4,712 | +70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | 12,649 | 14,095 | +11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,204 | 4,336 | +97% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | 25,937 | 21,025 | -19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,900 | 6,257 | +60% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | 17,783 | 17,456 | -2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,177 | 5,150 | +62% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→fail | 17,429 | 14,650 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,939 | 4,460 | +52% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 8,553 | 6,213 | -27% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,567 | 3,108 | +98% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | 15,481 | 8,921 | -42% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,475 | 3,484 | +41% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 14,291 | 12,271 | -14% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,302 | 4,406 | +91% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | 13,095 | 11,662 | -11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,901 | 3,677 | +93% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | 12,103 | 9,280 | -23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,917 | 3,328 | +74% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | 16,301 | 17,330 | +6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,398 | 4,642 | +94% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 14,185 | 15,489 | +9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,170 | 4,303 | +98% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 16,083 | 9,554 | -41% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,131 | 3,606 | +69% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 11,953 | 3,946 | -67% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,985 | 2,739 | +38% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 14,035 | 18,530 | +32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,249 | 4,581 | +104% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→fail | 30,733 | 20,537 | -33% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,059 | 5,276 | +72% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | pass→pass | 19,375 | 17,964 | -7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,600 | 4,864 | +87% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 23 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +4 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 23 comparable cases. 2 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.