Skip to content

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

14 Commits
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

researchbyskills — an evidence-only AI research workbench for Claude Code

Turn Claude Code into a rigorous, evidence-based research assistant. researchbyskills is a ready-to-clone template that makes Claude do literature reviews, fact-checks, and research reports grounded only in peer-reviewed scholarly sources and the current scientific consensus — never marketing, SEO listicles, press releases, or vendor blogs. It never fabricates a citation.

validate

Keywords: AI research assistant · evidence-based research · peer-reviewed literature review · systematic review · meta-analysis · fact-checking · citation verification · scientific consensus · PRISMA · GRADE · Claude Code skills · scholarly databases (PubMed, OpenAlex, arXiv, Semantic Scholar, Crossref, Europe PMC).


Why this exists

General-purpose AI is fast but unreliable for research: it cites papers that don't exist, leans on whatever ranks well on the open web, and presents a single study as settled science. This workbench fixes that with a disciplined pipeline and hard rules:

  • Scholarly sources only. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses first, then RCTs, then observational work, then authoritative bodies (WHO, IPCC, Cochrane, national academies).
  • No fabricated citations. Every DOI is resolved and every claim is checked against what the source actually says.
  • Consensus over cherry-picking. Settled science, active debate, and fringe positions are clearly distinguished — no false balance, no false certainty.
  • Reproducible. Search logs, PRISMA flow diagrams, risk-of-bias appraisal, and BibTeX export come built in.

The full rule set lives in CLAUDE.md and is loaded automatically on every task.

Quick start

  1. Install Claude Code and run it in this folder:
    claude
  2. Ask a research question, for example:
    • "Review the literature on the effect of X on Y."
    • "What does the science say about Z? Is there a consensus?"
    • "Fact-check this claim: …"
    • "Find meta-analyses on …"
  3. Claude loads the matching skill automatically, or you can invoke one directly: /research, /fact-check, /literature-search, and so on.
  4. Finished reports are written to the research/ directory (start from research/_TEMPLATE-review.md).

The research pipeline (skills in .claude/skills/)

Claude Code auto-detects these skills. The research orchestrator runs the full pipeline and delegates to the specialised skills:

Skill Role
/research Orchestrator — the whole process: frame → protocol → search → vet → verify → extract → appraise → synthesize → report
/research-question Scope and frame the question (PICO/PECO, inclusion criteria, domain-pack selection)
/research-protocol Pre-register a review protocol before searching (PROSPERO-style)
/literature-search Search scholarly databases (OpenAlex, PubMed, arXiv, Semantic Scholar, Crossref, Europe PMC…)
/source-credibility Vet sources; filter out sponsored, promotional, and predatory content
/citation-verification Confirm every citation exists and supports its claim (zero fabrication) + retraction check
/data-extraction Extract study data into a source-anchored evidence table
/critical-appraisal Risk of bias (RoB 2 / ROBINS-I / AMSTAR-2 …) and certainty of evidence (GRADE)
/scientific-consensus Establish the consensus and strength of evidence; guard against false balance
/evidence-synthesis Synthesize across sources; systematic reviews (PRISMA)
/research-report Assemble the final report with a full, verified bibliography + .bib export
/fact-check Fast verification of a single claim

Multi-agent research (subagents in .claude/agents/)

For broad tasks the research orchestrator fans out to subagents:

Agent Role
literature-scout Run in parallel (one per sub-question / database) to gather screened candidate sources fast, with a search log
skeptic A devil's advocate that attacks the draft once it exists — hunts disconfirming evidence, overreach, and citation-claim mismatches (the guard against confirmation bias)

Convenience & automation

  • .claude/settings.json — pre-authorises the read-only scholarly MCP tools (paper-search, openalex) for fewer permission prompts, plus a SessionStart hook.
  • .claude/hooks/session-start.sh — on session start, reminds Claude of the research rules and checks that uv/npx are available for the MCP servers.
  • scripts/validate_repo.py + GitHub Actions CI — validate the repository structure (skills, agents, references, templates) on every push and pull request.

Quality rules

The non-negotiable rules for every task are in CLAUDE.md. In short: evidence hierarchy (meta-analyses > single studies), no sponsored/predatory sources as evidence, zero fabricated citations, explicit separation of consensus from genuine debate, and reproducible search.

Reference material the skills draw on:

Scholarly database access (MCP)

.mcp.json configures Model Context Protocol servers that give Claude live access to the literature (no API key required):

  • paper-search (uvx paper-search-mcp) — arXiv, PubMed, bioRxiv/medRxiv, Europe PMC, Semantic Scholar, Crossref, OpenAlex.
  • openalex (npx @cyanheads/openalex-mcp-server) — 240M+ works, citation graph, trends.

Requirements: uv (for uvx) and Node.js (for npx). On first run, Claude Code asks permission to start the MCP servers. If you don't install them, the skills fall back to WebSearch restricted to scholarly domains — research still works.

The email in .mcp.json (OPENALEX_MAILTO) is only used for the OpenAlex "polite pool" (faster rate limits; sent as mailto=). Change it or remove it.

Repository structure

researchbyskills/
├── CLAUDE.md                 # research rules for Claude Code (always loaded)
├── .mcp.json                 # MCP servers with scholarly databases
├── README.md
├── .claude/
│   ├── settings.json         # MCP pre-authorisation + SessionStart hook
│   ├── hooks/
│   │   └── session-start.sh  # rules reminder + MCP runtime check
│   ├── agents/               # subagents (multi-agent research)
│   │   ├── literature-scout.md
│   │   └── skeptic.md
│   └── skills/               # skills (research pipeline) — 12 skills
│       ├── research/  research-question/  research-protocol/
│       ├── literature-search/  source-credibility/  citation-verification/
│       ├── data-extraction/  critical-appraisal/  scientific-consensus/
│       └── evidence-synthesis/  research-report/  fact-check/
├── references/               # shared knowledge for the skills (+ domains/)
├── research/                 # finished reports land here (+ templates)
├── scripts/validate_repo.py  # structure validator (no dependencies)
├── .github/workflows/        # CI: validate on every push / PR
└── CONTRIBUTING.md

Contributing

Contributions that strengthen evidence-based, peer-reviewed research are welcome. See CONTRIBUTING.md. Run python3 scripts/validate_repo.py before you push; CI runs the same check.

License & purpose

This repository is a clean, reusable research scaffold meant to serve the community — a starting point for anyone who wants AI-assisted research they can actually trust. Clone it, point Claude Code at it, and ask.

About

No description, website, or topics provided.

Resources

Contributing

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

Packages

Used by

Contributors

Languages