Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →hashgraph-online/book-academic
Academic writing patterns — IMRAD structure, literature review, argument chains, citation practices, thesis/dissertation layout.
Passed 22 of 23 test cases with the skill, and 18 of 23 without it.
and 1 more in the full report
4 fixed18 passed either way1 still failing0 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 4 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
I am outlining a monograph on 19th-century gothic literature. My advisor suggested organizing the chapters chronologically by author publication date. How should a humanities monograph argument be structured at the top level?
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| The main argument is organized as thesis, evidence chapters, synthesis, and conclusion. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Structure types by discipline:
Literature review: Organize by theme (not chronologically). Structure: establish field → identify gap → position this work. For each source: claim + methodology + limitation + relevance. Synthesis matrix: rows = themes, columns = sources, cells = positions.
Argument chain: Claim → Evidence → Warrant (connects evidence to claim) → Backing (supports warrant) → Qualifier (scope/limits) → Rebuttal (anticipate counter). Every chapter thesis supports the central thesis. Chapter thesis = topic sentence + position + scope.
Citation practices: Inline citation for (author, year). Block quote for >40 words. Paraphrase preferred over direct quote. Primary sources for claims, secondary for context. Citation density: 2-5 per paragraph in lit review, 0-1 in methods/results.
Abstract formula: Context (1-2 sentences) → Gap (1 sentence) → Purpose (1 sentence) → Method (1-2 sentences) → Key finding (1-2 sentences) → Significance (1 sentence). Total: 150-300 words.
Paragraph structure: Topic sentence (claim) → Evidence/analysis (2-4 sentences) → Concluding sentence (significance/bridge). MEAL plan: Main idea → Evidence → Analysis → Link to next.
Academic tone: Third person, present tense for established knowledge, past tense for methodology/findings. Avoid hedging pile-up ("it could perhaps be argued that maybe"). Precise language over verbose. Define terms at first use. Consistent terminology throughout.
Figures and tables: Numbered sequentially per chapter (Fig 3.1, Table 2.4). Caption below figures, above tables. Every figure/table referenced in text. Self-contained: readable without main text.
Cross-reference: Chapter.section.subsection numbering (2.3.1). Forward refs: "as discussed in Section 4.2". Back refs: "as established in Section 2.1". Glossary for discipline-specific terms.
Revision layers: Structure (argument flow, section balance) → Evidence (sufficiency, accuracy) → Writing (clarity, tone, conciseness) → Format (citation style, headings, spacing) → Proofread (typos, consistency).
test cases passed, vs 18 / 23 without
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.