research-citation-check
research-citation-check is a Literature review & citations skill for AI agents, published by huangwb8 in the ChineseResearchLaTeX repository on GitHub. Skillspace rates research-citation-check C (77/100) and it passed the safety scan; the rating is based on static analysis only.
当用户明确要求"核查/优化综述 `{主题}_review.tex` 的正文引用"、"运行 research-citation-check"，或要求使用旧名 check-review-alignment skill 时使用。通过宿主 AI 的语义理解逐条核查引用是否与文献内容吻合，只在发现致命性引用错误时对"包含引用的句子"做最小化改写，并优先复用 `research-literature-review` 的渲染脚本输出 PDF/Word，过渡期允许 fallback 到旧名 systematic-literature-review。核心原则：不为了改而改，无法确定是否为致命性错误时保留原样并在报告中警告。⚠ 不适用：用户只是想生成系统综述正文（应使用 research-literature-review）；用户只是想新增/核对 BibTeX 条目（应使用专门的 bib 管理流程）。
- Grade
- C
- Quality
- 77 / 100
- Safety
- Passed
- GitHub stars
- 2,524
Unproven: rated by static analysis only, not yet compared head-to-head.
Not launch-quality. It is graded C with a clean safety verdict, but our quality filters exclude it: a model that read it found it written only for the repository it lives in. So it is not in our launch-quality set, the skills our MCP server searches and recommends. How launch-quality is decided
Our two independent classifiers differ on this skill's category, so treat the placement as provisional.
This rating describes the version of the repository we crawled; it may have changed since, so go by its current files.
Our review
- Architecture
- 94 / 100
- Maturity
- Structured: ships references or scripts
- Security scan
- No issues found
- License
- MIT
- Adoption
- Adopted by 0 other repositories, in 0 collections
- Scope
- Repo-internal: written for the repository it lives in. tied to repo's LaTeX template, sibling skills and bug repo
Not checked yet
- Not judged on the rubric yet (not a contender in its category)
- No blind task eval yet
- Sibling files (scripts, references) not fetched; security scan covers SKILL.md only
Skillspace indexes and rates this skill; it does not host or endorse it. Run third-party skills at your own risk.