
Paper Analysis
- 18 installs
- 869 repo stars
- Updated June 8, 2026
- beita6969/scienceclaw
Paper Analysis is a skill that reads, summarizes, and critically analyzes scientific papers to extract findings, methodology, and limitations.
About
Provides a framework to read, summarize, and critically analyze scientific papers from a PDF, URL, or DOI. A researcher uses it to extract findings, assess methodology and validity, compare papers, and produce quick or deep structured reviews. It includes domain-specific checklists for RCTs, observational studies, machine-learning papers, and qualitative research.
- Reads, summarizes, and critically analyzes scientific papers
- Structured deep-analysis framework covering methodology, validity, and limitations
- Domain checklists for RCTs, observational, ML, and qualitative studies
Paper Analysis by the numbers
- 18 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #1,016 of 1,879 Documentation skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 2, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
paper-analysis capabilities & compatibility
Free; fetches papers via public sources and Semantic Scholar
- Capabilities
- paper summary · methodology critique · paper comparison
- Use cases
- research · documentation · pdf parsing
- Pricing
- Free
What paper-analysis says it does
Systematic scientific paper reading, summarization, and critical analysis.
Distinguish between what the paper claims and what the evidence supports
Extract key findings, methodology, limitations, and contributions.
npx skills add https://github.com/beita6969/scienceclaw --skill paper-analysisAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 18 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 869 |
| Last updated | June 8, 2026 |
| Repository | beita6969/scienceclaw ↗ |
What it does
Summarize and critically analyze scientific papers, extracting findings, methodology, and limitations.
Who is it for?
Summarizing a paper, critiquing methodology, and comparing studies
Skip if: Non-academic writing; it is built around scientific paper structure and critique
When should I use this skill?
A user shares a paper and asks to summarize, critique methodology, or extract findings
What you get
A structured summary or critical review of a paper with findings, methodology assessment, and limitations.
- Quick ~200-word summary
- Deep structured critical analysis
- Multi-paper comparison table
By the numbers
- 6-section deep-analysis framework
- ~200-word quick summary target
Files
Paper Analysis
Systematic scientific paper reading, summarization, and critical analysis.
Paper Acquisition
1. If user provides a DOI: fetch via https://doi.org/DOI or Semantic Scholar API 2. If user provides arXiv ID: fetch via https://arxiv.org/abs/ID 3. If user provides a URL: use web_fetch to extract content 4. If user provides a PDF file: read directly or use summarize skill
Analysis Framework
Quick Summary (default)
Provide in ~200 words:
- Research question / objective
- Method (1-2 sentences)
- Key findings (2-3 bullet points)
- Main contribution
- One key limitation
Deep Analysis
When requested, provide structured analysis:
1. Paper Metadata
- Title, authors, year, journal/venue, DOI
- Citation count (via Semantic Scholar)
2. Research Context
- Problem statement and motivation
- Research gap being addressed
- Theoretical framework
3. Methodology Assessment
- Study design (experimental/observational/computational/theoretical)
- Sample/dataset description
- Variables (independent, dependent, controls)
- Analysis methods
- Reproducibility assessment (data/code availability)
4. Results Evaluation
- Key findings with effect sizes and confidence intervals
- Statistical significance vs practical significance
- Figures and tables interpretation
- Are results consistent with claims?
5. Critical Assessment
Check for:
- Internal validity: confounds, selection bias, measurement error
- External validity: generalizability, ecological validity
- Statistical issues: multiple comparisons, p-hacking, small N
- Logical issues: correlation ≠ causation, survivorship bias
- Reporting issues: selective reporting, missing negative results
- Methodological rigor: appropriate controls, blinding, randomization
6. Contribution & Impact
- Novelty assessment
- Practical implications
- Theoretical implications
- Future directions suggested
Comparison Mode
When comparing multiple papers:
| Dimension | Paper A | Paper B | Paper C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Research Question | |||
| Method | |||
| Sample Size | |||
| Key Finding | |||
| Limitation | |||
| Strength |
Domain-Specific Checklists
RCT (Randomized Controlled Trial)
- CONSORT checklist compliance
- Randomization method, allocation concealment
- Blinding (single/double/triple)
- ITT vs per-protocol analysis
- Dropout rates and handling
Observational Studies
- STROBE checklist
- Confounding control methods
- Selection bias assessment
Machine Learning Papers
- Train/val/test split methodology
- Baseline comparisons
- Ablation studies
- Statistical significance of improvements
- Computational cost reporting
- Code/data availability
Qualitative Research
- Sampling strategy (purposive, theoretical, snowball)
- Data saturation
- Coding methodology (thematic, grounded theory)
- Reflexivity and positionality
- Member checking / triangulation
Output Style
- Use academic but accessible language
- Cite specific sections/figures/tables from the paper
- Distinguish between what the paper claims and what the evidence supports
- Flag any red flags clearly but diplomatically
Related skills
FAQ
What inputs does it accept?
A DOI, arXiv ID, URL, or PDF file of the paper.
Does it have domain-specific rigor checks?
Yes, checklists for RCTs (CONSORT), observational studies (STROBE), machine-learning papers, and qualitative research.