literature-review-zh: humanities and social-science review skill

AI-assistant skill documented for literature-review writing with humanities and social-science adaptations: discipline routing, citation tracing, historical-source handling and type-specific reference verification. Its README describes version and translator attribution, secondary-citation marking and checks against independent factual sources.

Workflow level n/a Source Repository-documented Outcome Not empirically evaluated here

Evidence & verification

Source level

Repository-documented
Grounded in a maintainer repository/README. Availability, stars and forks do not establish research benefit or correctness.

Outcome verification

Not empirically evaluated here
A documented resource or intended workflow, not a demonstrated academic outcome. No empirical benefit is established by its inclusion.

Sources checked

2026-10-17 (UTC)

Primary README documentation only; capability descriptions not evaluated outcomes. README comparison table, preserved rules and delivery section support the bounded process description. Absolute no-fabrication wording is treated as an intended rule, not demonstrated reliability. Unknown upstream provenance and missing helper scripts are explicitly preserved.

Source-checked does not mean independently reproduced. See the Method page for how these labels are assigned.

Sources (1)

Research applicability

Getting started

Untested editorial guidance: inspect the provenance/rights warning and missing-script notes first; review SKILL.md and references, then pilot on known humanities sources and verify catalogue records and quotations independently.

Maintenance

Mutable main branch retrieved; no maintenance reliability audit.

License

README licence statement only; no legal audit. Upstream rights are unresolved; MIT limited to additions/modifications.

Workflow & human oversight

Resource-level automation unspecified. The researcher defines the task, controls access and checks sources and outputs.

Workflow level is not an evidence score; higher is not better evidence.

Approach

Limitations

README-only review; no execution or citation-accuracy evaluation. The maintainer says the original skill author and licence are unknown; MIT covers only their modifications/additions, not unidentified upstream content. The README reports two mentioned helper scripts absent (repository tree/code not independently inspected), with a documented fallback to search tools or user-supplied results. Missing upstream identity prevents exhaustive derivation/alias resolution; no relationship to queue 201 is asserted. Admission is a bounded documentary listing, not a runnable-package verification or rights clearance.

Reproducibility

No installation, tests or independent outcome reproduction.

Adoption requirements

Requires a SKILL.md-compatible assistant and bundled locales/references, access to relevant catalogues or user-provided search results, and researcher checks of editions, page numbers and attribution. Resolve rights for the intended reuse; do not presume the entire inherited skill is MIT-licensed. Keep restricted archives and private documents within approved systems.

Comments

No comments yet.

Add a comment

Comments are held for moderation before appearing. Critical or corrective comments are welcome — especially evidence that an entry overstates what has been verified.