SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AA semantic-scholar-deep

Deep research over the Semantic Scholar Graph API. Covers endpoints missing from allenai's lookup skill — paper references (backward citations), recommendations, batch paper lookup (up to 500 IDs), snippet search, and multi-hop citation graph traversal (BFS forward/backward). Use when the user asks to build a citation graph, expand a literature seed, find related work, run a reference network traversal, explore what a paper cites or what cites it beyond simple lookup, or batch-resolve many DOI/arXiv/S2 IDs. For multi-step research questions, delegate to the deep-paper-researcher subagent to keep the main context clean. Not for single paper-by-ID lookups (use semantic-scholar-lookup) or topical discovery (use web_search_advanced_exa).

CodeAlive-AI/ai-driven-development Agent Skills author: CodeAlive-AI MIT 7 files · 2 scripts body ≈ 1 993 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 19 h ago

Deep research over the Semantic Scholar Graph API.

As a process A 87/100 · Runs to the end — weak spots: progress reporting

IntegrationResearchtype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
99/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
98
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
A
87/100
Runs to the end
Progress reporting w 2
0
Result and completion w 14
60
Inputs and preconditions w 11
70
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 7. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 87/100

    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 85Steps. 46 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
    • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
    • 100Failures and branches. 2 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1993 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
    • low The response is described with custom markup (3 tags): a typed call is more reliable

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
    • +3Description length 743: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 15 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 46 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
    • +3All 2 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 98.