All skills
imbad0202 avatar

/academic-pipeline

@7de1c9d

Orchestrator for the full academic research pipeline: research -> write -> integrity check -> review -> revise -> re-review -> re-revise -> final integrity check -> finalize. Coordinates deep-research, academic-paper, and academic-paper-reviewer into a seamless 10-stage workflow with mandatory, coverage-bounded integrity checks, two-stage peer review, and auditable quality-assurance artifacts. Triggers on: academic pipeline, research to paper, full paper workflow, paper pipeline, end-to-end paper, research-to-publication, complete paper workflow, 연구부터 논문까지, 연구 주제 설정부터 논문 완성까지, 논문 전체 워크플로, flujo de trabajo académico, investigación a artículo, flujo completo de artículo, pipeline de investigación completa, publicación de investigación, flujo de trabajo completo del artículo.

Use this Skill: https://skilld.dev/gh/imbad0202/academic-research-skills/academic-pipeline

This session only. Nothing lands on disk.

referencesteam_collaboration_protocol.md

≈2.6k tokens on demand. Your agent reads this file only when SKILL.md points to it.

Team Collaboration Protocol

Purpose

Guidelines for coordinating multi-person academic research teams using the pipeline. Claude Code runs as a single-user session; this protocol documents the human coordination layer that wraps around pipeline executions.


Role Definitions

Role Pipeline Stages Responsibilities
Research Lead Stage 1 (RESEARCH) Defines RQ, manages literature search, approves synthesis, sets theoretical framework
Lead Author Stage 2 (WRITE), Stage 4/4' (REVISE) Writes/revises paper, makes final content decisions, owns the manuscript
Methods Specialist Stage 1 (methodology), Stage 2 (methods section) Ensures methodological rigor, validates statistical analysis, reviews data integrity
Review Coordinator Stage 3/3' (REVIEW) Manages simulated review process, distributes feedback, facilitates revision coaching
Integration Lead All stages Ensures consistency across stages, manages handoffs, resolves cross-stage conflicts

Role Assignment Rules

  • One person may hold multiple roles (common in small teams)
  • Research Lead and Lead Author are the minimum required roles (can be the same person)
  • Integration Lead is recommended for teams of 3+
  • Methods Specialist is strongly recommended for empirical papers
  • All role assignments should be documented at pipeline intake

Handoff Protocol

For each stage transition, the following handoff procedure applies:

Stage 1 -> Stage 2 (Research -> Write)

Item Detail
Who hands off Research Lead
Who receives Lead Author
Materials RQ Brief, Bibliography, Synthesis Report (conforming to Schemas 1-3 in shared/handoff_schemas.md)
Approval needed Research Lead confirms synthesis is complete and RQ is finalized
Handoff checklist All Material Passports (Schema 9) attached; bibliography coverage is assessed against the planned claims and field-specific evidence needs; synthesis structure fits the material rather than a fixed theme count

Stage 2 -> Stage 2.5 (Write -> Integrity)

Item Detail
Who hands off Lead Author
Who receives Integration Lead (or Lead Author if no Integration Lead)
Materials Paper Draft (conforming to Schema 4)
Approval needed Lead Author confirms draft is ready for verification
Handoff checklist All sections complete; reference list formatted; word count within target range

Stage 2.5 -> Stage 3 (Integrity -> Review)

Item Detail
Who hands off Integration Lead
Who receives Review Coordinator
Materials Stage 2.5 Paper Draft (verified, or carrying the recorded FAIL-loop warning) + Integrity Report (Schema 5)
Approval needed Integrity verdict is PASS (any PASS_WITH_CONDITIONS items acknowledged), or the recorded Integrity Check FAIL Loop user decision
Handoff checklist Integrity Report attached; all SERIOUS/MEDIUM issues resolved, or covered by the recorded FAIL-loop decision

Stage 3 -> Stage 4 (Review -> Revise)

Item Detail
Who hands off Review Coordinator
Who receives Lead Author + Methods Specialist (if methodology issues)
Materials Review Report (Schema 6) + Revision Roadmap (Schema 7)
Approval needed Review Coordinator confirms roadmap is complete; Lead Author reviews before starting
Handoff checklist All revision items categorized and prioritized; coaching session completed (or skipped by Lead Author)

Stage 4 -> Stage 3' (Revise -> Re-Review)

Item Detail
Who hands off Lead Author
Who receives Review Coordinator
Materials Revised Draft + hard-required Original pre-revision Draft + immutable Round-1 Revision Roadmap + exact author-adjudication sidecar + fully replayed Revision-Evidence Bundle + Response to Reviewers + Editorial Decision Letter + Round-1 findings + exact ordered patch/report pairs matching the bundle + Round-1 Reviewer Configuration Cards. This is the default current #576 1.1 re-review transfer; missing original/roadmap/author/bundle fails closed. A user-requested fresh full review at 3' is a separate branch with Revised Draft + available context.
Approval needed Lead Author confirms all addressable items are handled
Handoff checklist Re-review mode: Response to Reviewers covers every roadmap item; new references verified. Fresh full review at 3': no roadmap-coverage check (no Round-1 Roadmap exists); new references verified

Stage 4.5 -> Stage 5 (Final Integrity -> Finalize)

Item Detail
Who hands off Integration Lead
Who receives Lead Author
Materials Final Draft (verified, or carrying the recorded partially-unverified warning) + Final Integrity Report
Approval needed Integrity verdict PASS with zero issues (or the recorded Integrity Check FAIL Loop user decision)
Handoff checklist All previous integrity issues resolved, or covered by the recorded FAIL-loop decision with the partially-unverified warning carried forward; Material Passport verification_status set to VERIFIED only on a zero-issue PASS (a FAIL-loop continuation keeps UNVERIFIED)

Version Control

Git Branching Strategy

main
  |-- paper/draft-v1          (Stage 2 output)
  |-- paper/post-integrity-v1 (Stage 2.5 output)
  |-- paper/post-review-v1    (Stage 4 output)
  |-- paper/final-v1          (Stage 5 output)

Tagging Convention

Tag When Example
v0.1-draft After Stage 2 completion First complete draft
v0.2-post-integrity After Stage 2.5 PASS Draft verified for integrity
v0.3-post-review After Stage 4 completion First revision complete
v0.4-post-rereview After Stage 4' completion (if applicable) Second revision complete
v1.0-final After Stage 5 completion Final manuscript

Rules

  • Never overwrite; always create a new version
  • All versions are preserved for audit trail
  • Version labels must match the Material Passport version_label field (Schema 9 in shared/handoff_schemas.md)
  • Each team member's changes should be attributable (use git author info)

Conflict Resolution

Conflict Type Resolution Authority Escalation Path
Content disagreements Lead Author has final say If unresolved: Research Lead mediates
Methodological disagreements Methods Specialist has final say If unresolved: cite literature precedent
Scope disagreements Research Lead has final say If unresolved: team vote
Formatting/style disagreements Lead Author has final say Follow target journal guidelines
Integrity findings disagreements Integration Lead has final say Cannot override SERIOUS findings

Disagreement Documentation

All disagreements must be documented in the revision tracking:

## Disagreement Record

**Date**: [date]
**Stage**: [stage]
**Parties**: [who disagreed]
**Issue**: [what the disagreement was about]
**Resolution**: [how it was resolved]
**Authority**: [who made the final call]
**Rationale**: [why this decision was made]

Communication Templates

1. Handoff Notification

## Handoff: Stage [X] -> Stage [Y]

**From**: [Role] ([Name])
**To**: [Role] ([Name])
**Date**: [date]

**Materials Delivered**:
- [Material 1] (version: [version_label])
- [Material 2] (version: [version_label])

**Status Summary**:
[1-2 sentence summary of what was accomplished and any open items]

**Action Required**:
[What the receiving person needs to do next]

**Deadline**: [if applicable]

2. Review Request

## Review Request: [Paper Title]

**From**: [Review Coordinator]
**To**: [Team / External Reviewer]
**Date**: [date]

**Paper Version**: [version_label]
**Word Count**: [N]
**Review Type**: [Internal simulated / External journal / Team peer review]

**Focus Areas**:
1. [specific area to focus on]
2. [specific area to focus on]

**Deadline**: [date]
**Return Format**: [Use Schema 6 format from shared/handoff_schemas.md]

3. Revision Assignment

## Revision Assignment: [Paper Title]

**From**: [Review Coordinator]
**To**: [Lead Author / Methods Specialist]
**Date**: [date]

**Revision Round**: [N]
**Total Items**: [N] (must_fix: [N], should_fix: [N], consider: [N])

**Your Assignments**:
- [REV-001]: [brief description] — assigned to [name]
- [REV-003]: [brief description] — assigned to [name]

**Deadline**: [date]
**Coordination Notes**: [any dependencies between revision items]

Workflow for Teams

Small Team (2-3 people)

Person A (Research Lead + Lead Author):
  - Runs Stage 1 (RESEARCH) with their Claude session
  - Runs Stage 2 (WRITE) with their Claude session
  - Receives revision items, runs Stage 4/4'
  - Runs Stage 5 (FINALIZE)

Person B (Methods Specialist + Review Coordinator):
  - Reviews Stage 1 methodology output
  - Reviews Stage 2 methods section
  - Manages Stage 3/3' review process
  - Handles specific methodology revision items

Handoff: via shared folder or git repo
Materials: conform to schemas in shared/handoff_schemas.md

Large Team (4+ people)

Add Integration Lead role:
  - Monitors all stage transitions
  - Validates handoff completeness
  - Resolves cross-stage inconsistencies
  - Maintains pipeline state document (shared with all team members)

Limitations

  • Claude Code runs as a single-user session; this protocol documents the HUMAN coordination layer
  • Each team member runs their own pipeline stages independently in separate Claude sessions
  • Handoff materials (conforming to schemas in shared/handoff_schemas.md) ensure consistency across sessions
  • Real-time co-editing is not supported; use git or shared documents for synchronization
  • Pipeline state tracking is per-session; the Integration Lead must manually synchronize state across sessions
  • The pipeline does not enforce team role permissions; discipline is maintained by convention

Source: SKILL.md on GitHub

1 alert6d5 checks · Risk SAFE
  • Gen Agent Trust Hub6d

    The skill is a complex academic research orchestrator that manages a multi-stage workflow from research to final manuscript. It includes robust security patterns, such as explicit 'instruction-data' boundaries, to protect against malicious content in research materials. The skill relies on local script execution and standard academic tools like Pandoc and Tectonic for its functionality.

  • Socket6d

    No alerts

  • Snyk6d

    Risk: MEDIUM · 1 issue

  • Runlayer6mo

    5/13 files flagged

  • ZeroLeaks5mo

    1 finding · Score: 86/100

Signed by skilld at 7de1c9d. This ties the file your Agent reads to that commit on GitHub. It does not review the instructions.

Last checked against GitHub 2 days ago.

Activeupdated last week
Other metadata
metadata
{
  "version": "3.22.2",
  "last_updated": "2026-09-25",
  "depends_on": "deep-research, academic-paper, academic-paper-reviewer",
  "status": "active",
  "data_access_level": "raw",
  "task_type": "open-ended",
  "related_skills": [
    "deep-research",
    "academic-paper",
    "academic-paper-reviewer"
  ]
}

README badge

README badge for imbad0202/academic-research-skills/academic-pipeline