git:20260418.b61c052 to git:20260418.f397968

---

name: analyze-paper

description: "Extract structured information from a research paper: system model, theorem statements, proof techniques, complexity claims, and red flags. Use when asked to analyze, summarize, or review an academic paper."

user-invocable: true

argument-hint: "<paper-path> [--output <path>] [--goal \"<goal>\"]"

---

# Analyze Paper

Extract structured information from an academic paper, producing a comprehensive summary that downstream skills can build on.

## Usage

```

# Analyze the primary paper under study

analyze-paper path/to/paper.pdf

# Analyze a literature paper with research goal as context

analyze-paper reaper-workspace/papers/2024-1234.pdf --goal "post-quantum threshold signatures" --output reaper-workspace/papers/2024-1234-notes.md

```

**Argument parsing:** The first non-flag argument is the paper path. Optional flags:

- `--output <path>`: Write output to the given path instead of the default `reaper-workspace/notes/paper-summary.md`.

- `--goal "<text>"`: The research goal as additional context. When provided, the output includes a **Relevance** section assessing how the paper relates to this goal, and reading depth is calibrated by relevance (see Step 1).

## Path Resolution Protocol

This skill references files in sibling skills. **`{{REAPER_SKILL_DIR}}`** below is a template placeholder — **you MUST substitute it with the absolute install path of the `/reaper` skill before reading, or the read will fail.** Common install locations:

- `~/.claude/skills/reaper/` (Claude Code)

- `~/.cursor/skills/reaper/` (Cursor)

- `~/.agents/skills/reaper/` (Codex CLI, Cline, Gemini CLI, Copilot, OpenCode, Warp, Goose, Replit — universal target)

- `~/.continue/skills/reaper/` (Continue)

- `~/.windsurf/skills/reaper/` (Windsurf)

- `<repo-root>/skills/reaper/` (during repo development)

**Sibling-skill dependency**: This skill assumes the full `/reaper` package was installed together (`npx skills add SebastianElvis/reaper`). Single-skill installs will fail to resolve sibling references.

## Instructions

### 1. Read the Paper

Read the paper at the provided path using your host's file-read primitive (works for PDFs and text files on hosts that support PDF reading; otherwise extract text first).

Follow the three-pass strategy from `{{REAPER_SKILL_DIR}}/references/paper-analysis.md`:

- **Pass 1 (skeleton)**: Abstract, introduction, conclusion, theorem statements. Identify the main claims.

- **Pass 2 (construction)**: Protocol details, proof sketches, figures. Understand the key technical idea.

- **Pass 3 (proofs)**: Full formal proofs, appendices, security reductions. Verify logical steps.

When `--goal` is provided, calibrate depth by relevance to the goal: Pass 1 for all papers; Pass 2 for medium-relevance; all three passes for high-relevance papers.

### 2. Extract Information

For each section below, extract the relevant information. When extracting theorem statements or formal claims, copy them **verbatim** — do not paraphrase.

**Critical**: Distinguish what the paper *claims* (in the introduction, abstract) from what it *actually proves* (in the theorems, proofs). Note any discrepancies.

### 3. Write Output

Write the extracted information to `reaper-workspace/notes/paper-summary.md` (or the path specified by `--output`) with the following structure:

```markdown

# Paper Summary: [Paper Title]

## Metadata

- **Title**:

- **Authors**:

- **Venue/Year**:

- **Paper ID**: (ePrint, arXiv, DOI)

- **Link**: (e.g., https://arxiv.org/abs/XXXX.XXXXX or https://eprint.iacr.org/YYYY/NNNN)

## Problem Statement

What problem does this paper solve? Why does it matter?

## System Model

[Extract all model dimensions relevant to the paper's domain. Consult `{{REAPER_SKILL_DIR}}/references/model.md` for the domain-appropriate dimensions to extract. Every applicable dimension must have a concrete answer.]

## Construction Overview

High-level protocol description. Key technical idea. Building blocks used.

## Key Results

List each theorem/claim verbatim:

1. **Theorem X.X**: [exact statement]

- Model: [exact model under which this is proved]

- Proof technique: [game-based / simulation / reduction]

## Proof Technique

Overall proof approach. Key lemmas. Reduction chain. Where the corruption threshold and network model are used.

## Complexity Claims

- Communication:

- Rounds:

- Computation:

## Strengths

[Label each major/minor: novelty, methodology fit, proof rigor, evaluation quality, clarity.]

## Weaknesses

[Label each major/minor/fatal: broken methodology, missing proofs, unjustified claims, unfair comparisons, unclear writing, overclaimed results.]

## Key Definitions and Notation

Non-standard notation. Formal definitions referenced by the proofs.

## Red Flags

Any concerns identified during reading (see `{{REAPER_SKILL_DIR}}/references/paper-analysis.md` for common red flags).

## Relevance

[Present ONLY when --goal is provided. Tag one or more: *problem definition*, *formalization*, *solution technique*, *negative result*, *literature/context*, *writing model*. One sentence per tag explaining how this paper relates to the research goal.]

```

Sections should be **proportional to what the paper warrants**. If a paper has no complexity claims, omit that section. If the proof technique is trivial, keep it brief. The template is a guide, not a form to fill in mechanically.

### Quality Criteria

- Every theorem statement is copied verbatim, not paraphrased

- The system model section is complete — no missing dimensions (network, adversary, trust, communication, crypto)

- Strengths and weaknesses are labeled with severity (major/minor/fatal) and are honest — if the paper looks solid, say so; if there are concerns, list them specifically

- Red flags section is honest — no concerns is a valid answer

- The summary is useful standalone — a reader who hasn't seen the paper should understand the key claims and approach

- When `--goal` is provided, relevance tags are specific to the goal, not generic ("related to our topic")

- If the PDF is unreadable, try page-by-page with the `pages` parameter. If it still fails, report the error — do not fabricate a summary