SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AB academic-writing-refiner

Refine academic writing for computer science research papers targeting top-tier venues (NeurIPS, ICLR, ICML, AAAI, IJCAI, ACL, EMNLP, NAACL, CVPR, WWW, KDD, SIGIR, CIKM, and similar). Use this skill whenever a user asks to improve, polish, refine, edit, or proofread academic or research writing — including paper drafts, abstracts, introductions, related work sections, methodology descriptions, experiment write-ups, or conclusion sections. Also trigger when users paste LaTeX content and ask for writing help, mention "camera-ready", "rebuttal", "paper revision", or reference any academic venue or conference. This skill handles both full paper refinement and section-by-section editing.

modbender/skill-library-mcp Agent Skills author: modbender MIT 4 files body ≈ 2 281 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 3 d ago

Refine academic writing for computer science research papers targeting top-tier venues (NeurIPS, ICLR, ICML, AAAI, IJCAI, ACL, EMNLP, NAACL, CVPR, WWW, KDD…

As a process B 77/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, running it twice, progress reporting

GeneratorLaTeXResearchtype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: OpenClaw 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) Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
97/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
92
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
77/100
Nearly there
Progress reporting w 2
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
30
Running it twice w 4
30
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: 4. 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 77/100

    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 30Running it twice. 5 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70Failures and branches. 4 branches
    • 85Steps. 35 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2281 tokens

    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

    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 3 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 691: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 11 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 35 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 92.