/cs-litreview¶
Command: /cs:litreview <research question>
The cs-litreview persona produces a strategically planned mini literature review as an 8-section .docx research guide.
When to Run¶
- Starting research on an unfamiliar field
- Writing a paper that needs grounding in current literature
- Mapping the "lay of the land" before committing to a research direction
- Want a curated reading list with key authors + foundational papers + gaps
When NOT to Run (use Consensus directly)¶
- Looking for ONE specific paper (just search Consensus)
- Quick lookup with no need for synthesis
- Field you already know well and just need a recent papers list
Forcing Intake (3 Questions, One at a Time)¶
| Q | Asks | Default if forcing-choice |
|---|---|---|
| Q1 | Research question (1-2 sentences, specific) | refuses vague; "AI in medicine" gets pushed back once |
| Q2 | Framework: PICO / SPIDER / Decomposition / Hybrid / You-pick | "you pick" (skill recommends from Q1) |
| Q3 | Tentative depth: Quick (5) / Standard (10) / Deep (20) | re-confirmed at post-Phase-2 checkpoint |
What You Get¶
After Phase 0 intake + Phase 1 recon + Phase 2 framework + interactive checkpoint + Phase 3 searches:
research_guide_<topic>_<date>.docx with 8 sections:
- Topic Overview — single tight paragraph
- Start Here — Priority Reading Order — 5-7 hyperlinked papers (best-review → foundational → frontier → gap)
- How the Field Got Here — chronological narrative + timeline table
- Sub-area Guides — one per sub-area (4 parts each: synthesis / key papers / search terms / boolean strings)
- Key Research Groups — top 3-5 authors/groups with representative papers
- Open Questions & Gaps — methodological / population / conceptual
- Bibliography — alphabetical, hyperlinked, every inline citation matches
- Audit Log — search table + counts + detected plan tier
Interactive Checkpoint (Mid-Run)¶
After Phase 2 (framework selected, sub-areas generated), the skill halts with a forcing-options prompt:
Framework breakdown:
| {Component} | How it maps to your topic | Proposed sub-area |
|---|---|---|
| Population | ... | Sub-area 1: ... |
| Intervention | ... | Sub-area 2: ... |
| Comparison | ... | Sub-area 3: ... |
| Outcome | ... | Sub-area 4: ... |
| Cross-cutting | ... | Sub-area 5: ... |
Confirm depth (plan-tier detected: free / ~10 results per search):
1. Quick scan (5 searches)
2. Standard review (10 searches)
3. Deep dive (20 searches)
Sub-area options:
- Looks good — proceed
- Adjust: add sub-area on [X]
- Adjust: replace [Y] with [Z]
- Restart with different framework
This is the last cheap moment to correct course before search budget is consumed. Skill refuses to start Phase 3 without explicit user choice.
Discipline (Research-Pack Convention)¶
- One intake question per turn. Never bundle.
- Sequential Consensus calls. 1 q/sec rate limit. NEVER parallelize.
- Plan-tier detected at first search, reported at checkpoint.
- Halt at checkpoint. No Phase 3 without confirmation.
- Source discipline — cite only THIS session's Consensus results. Training knowledge labeled
[Not from Consensus]. - Three-count tracking — searches / unique papers / cited.
- Retry once after 3s — then log. 3 consecutive failures → stop.
Workflow¶
# Phase 0 intake (Q1-Q3 one at a time)
python ../skills/litreview/scripts/citation_tracker.py --action start --session NAME
python ../skills/litreview/scripts/framework_recommender.py --question "<Q1>"
# Phase 1 recon (1 Consensus search; record sent + received)
# Phase 2 framework + sub-area generation
# CHECKPOINT — wait for user
# Phase 3 searches (sequential, 1 q/sec, budget per tier):
# 5/10/20 searches across sub-areas + review + era-gated + follow-up
# Phase 4 cross-search aggregation + DOCX
python ../skills/litreview/scripts/cross_search_aggregator.py --session NAME
# Generate DOCX via Node.js docx library
python3 -c "import zipfile,sys; zipfile.ZipFile(sys.argv[1]).testzip()" output.docx # zip-integrity check; then confirm required sections present
python ../skills/litreview/scripts/citation_tracker.py --action close --session NAME
Trigger Phrases (auto-invoke without /cs:)¶
- "litreview on [topic]"
- "literature review on [topic]"
- "I'm starting a literature review on X"
- "I'm writing a paper on X"
- "help me research X"
- "I'm doing research on X"
- "can you help me research X"
Do NOT trigger for: single one-off paper searches — that's a plain Consensus search.
Anti-Patterns Rejected¶
- Parallelizing Consensus calls
- Skipping the interactive checkpoint
- Padding thin results with training knowledge
- Defaulting to non-PICO without justification
- Citing papers in chat that didn't come from Consensus this session
- Hardcoding plan tier instead of detecting
- Skipping era-gated searches in standard/deep budgets
- Skipping cross-search intelligence (repeat-hits, recurring authors)
- Truncating Consensus URLs
Related¶
- Agent:
cs-litreview - Skill:
litreview - Source spec:
megaprompts/09-litreview-megaprompt.md - Sibling:
/cs:pulse(research pack) - Future siblings:
/cs:grants,/cs:patent,/cs:dossier,/cs:syllabus
Version: 1.0.0
Source: Path-B direct conversion of megaprompts/09-litreview-megaprompt.md