From df32d6bea84ef5f0984539c3989c4840216876a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Affaan Mustafa Date: Mon, 11 May 2026 08:07:35 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] docs: salvage scientific research skills --- .claude-plugin/marketplace.json | 2 +- .claude-plugin/plugin.json | 2 +- .opencode/opencode.json | 5 + AGENTS.md | 4 +- README.md | 6 +- README.zh-CN.md | 2 +- docs/zh-CN/AGENTS.md | 4 +- docs/zh-CN/README.md | 6 +- manifests/install-modules.json | 5 +- package.json | 3 + skills/scientific-db-pubmed-database/SKILL.md | 175 ++++++++++++++++ .../SKILL.md | 192 ++++++++++++++++++ .../SKILL.md | 160 +++++++++++++++ 13 files changed, 552 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) create mode 100644 skills/scientific-db-pubmed-database/SKILL.md create mode 100644 skills/scientific-thinking-literature-review/SKILL.md create mode 100644 skills/scientific-thinking-scholar-evaluation/SKILL.md diff --git a/.claude-plugin/marketplace.json b/.claude-plugin/marketplace.json index 982fdfea..6e9b770f 100644 --- a/.claude-plugin/marketplace.json +++ b/.claude-plugin/marketplace.json @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ { "name": "ecc", "source": "./", - "description": "The most comprehensive Claude Code plugin — 53 agents, 192 skills, 69 legacy command shims, selective install profiles, and production-ready hooks for TDD, security scanning, code review, and continuous learning", + "description": "The most comprehensive Claude Code plugin — 53 agents, 195 skills, 69 legacy command shims, selective install profiles, and production-ready hooks for TDD, security scanning, code review, and continuous learning", "version": "2.0.0-rc.1", "author": { "name": "Affaan Mustafa", diff --git a/.claude-plugin/plugin.json b/.claude-plugin/plugin.json index 21b06901..0673fbaf 100644 --- a/.claude-plugin/plugin.json +++ b/.claude-plugin/plugin.json @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ { "name": "ecc", "version": "2.0.0-rc.1", - "description": "Battle-tested Claude Code plugin for engineering teams — 53 agents, 192 skills, 69 legacy command shims, production-ready hooks, and selective install workflows evolved through continuous real-world use", + "description": "Battle-tested Claude Code plugin for engineering teams — 53 agents, 195 skills, 69 legacy command shims, production-ready hooks, and selective install workflows evolved through continuous real-world use", "author": { "name": "Affaan Mustafa", "url": "https://x.com/affaanmustafa" diff --git a/.opencode/opencode.json b/.opencode/opencode.json index 947302f5..0ae9726c 100644 --- a/.opencode/opencode.json +++ b/.opencode/opencode.json @@ -22,6 +22,11 @@ "plugin": [ "./plugins" ], + "skills": { + "paths": [ + "../skills" + ] + }, "agent": { "build": { "description": "Primary coding agent for development work", diff --git a/AGENTS.md b/AGENTS.md index 943f79eb..f3a9852c 100644 --- a/AGENTS.md +++ b/AGENTS.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ # Everything Claude Code (ECC) — Agent Instructions -This is a **production-ready AI coding plugin** providing 53 specialized agents, 192 skills, 69 commands, and automated hook workflows for software development. +This is a **production-ready AI coding plugin** providing 53 specialized agents, 195 skills, 69 commands, and automated hook workflows for software development. **Version:** 2.0.0-rc.1 @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ Troubleshoot failures: check test isolation → verify mocks → fix implementat ``` agents/ — 53 specialized subagents -skills/ — 192 workflow skills and domain knowledge +skills/ — 195 workflow skills and domain knowledge commands/ — 69 slash commands hooks/ — Trigger-based automations rules/ — Always-follow guidelines (common + per-language) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index f28dd79d..99b0cfce 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ If you stacked methods, clean up in this order: /plugin list ecc@ecc ``` -**That's it!** You now have access to 53 agents, 192 skills, and 69 legacy command shims. +**That's it!** You now have access to 53 agents, 195 skills, and 69 legacy command shims. ### Dashboard GUI @@ -1338,7 +1338,7 @@ The configuration is automatically detected from `.opencode/opencode.json`. |---------|-------------|----------|--------| | Agents | PASS: 53 agents | PASS: 12 agents | **Claude Code leads** | | Commands | PASS: 69 commands | PASS: 31 commands | **Claude Code leads** | -| Skills | PASS: 192 skills | PASS: 37 skills | **Claude Code leads** | +| Skills | PASS: 195 skills | PASS: 37 skills | **Claude Code leads** | | Hooks | PASS: 8 event types | PASS: 11 events | **OpenCode has more!** | | Rules | PASS: 29 rules | PASS: 13 instructions | **Claude Code leads** | | MCP Servers | PASS: 14 servers | PASS: Full | **Full parity** | @@ -1443,7 +1443,7 @@ ECC is the **first plugin to maximize every major AI coding tool**. Here's how e |---------|------------|------------|-----------|----------| | **Agents** | 53 | Shared (AGENTS.md) | Shared (AGENTS.md) | 12 | | **Commands** | 69 | Shared | Instruction-based | 31 | -| **Skills** | 192 | Shared | 10 (native format) | 37 | +| **Skills** | 195 | Shared | 10 (native format) | 37 | | **Hook Events** | 8 types | 15 types | None yet | 11 types | | **Hook Scripts** | 20+ scripts | 16 scripts (DRY adapter) | N/A | Plugin hooks | | **Rules** | 34 (common + lang) | 34 (YAML frontmatter) | Instruction-based | 13 instructions | diff --git a/README.zh-CN.md b/README.zh-CN.md index 95eeb68c..0373aee5 100644 --- a/README.zh-CN.md +++ b/README.zh-CN.md @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ Copy-Item -Recurse rules/typescript "$HOME/.claude/rules/" /plugin list ecc@ecc ``` -**完成！** 你现在可以使用 53 个代理、192 个技能和 69 个命令。 +**完成！** 你现在可以使用 53 个代理、195 个技能和 69 个命令。 ### multi-* 命令需要额外配置 diff --git a/docs/zh-CN/AGENTS.md b/docs/zh-CN/AGENTS.md index d7b6be41..434bea5b 100644 --- a/docs/zh-CN/AGENTS.md +++ b/docs/zh-CN/AGENTS.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ # Everything Claude Code (ECC) — 智能体指令 -这是一个**生产就绪的 AI 编码插件**，提供 53 个专业代理、192 项技能、69 条命令以及自动化钩子工作流，用于软件开发。 +这是一个**生产就绪的 AI 编码插件**，提供 53 个专业代理、195 项技能、69 条命令以及自动化钩子工作流，用于软件开发。 **版本:** 2.0.0-rc.1 @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ ``` agents/ — 53 个专业子代理 -skills/ — 192 个工作流技能和领域知识 +skills/ — 195 个工作流技能和领域知识 commands/ — 69 个斜杠命令 hooks/ — 基于触发的自动化 rules/ — 始终遵循的指导方针（通用 + 每种语言） diff --git a/docs/zh-CN/README.md b/docs/zh-CN/README.md index 59a9219b..0d8938bc 100644 --- a/docs/zh-CN/README.md +++ b/docs/zh-CN/README.md @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ Copy-Item -Recurse rules/typescript "$HOME/.claude/rules/" /plugin list ecc@ecc ``` -**搞定！** 你现在可以使用 53 个智能体、192 项技能和 69 个命令了。 +**搞定！** 你现在可以使用 53 个智能体、195 项技能和 69 个命令了。 *** @@ -1134,7 +1134,7 @@ opencode |---------|-------------|----------|--------| | 智能体 | PASS: 53 个 | PASS: 12 个 | **Claude Code 领先** | | 命令 | PASS: 69 个 | PASS: 31 个 | **Claude Code 领先** | -| 技能 | PASS: 192 项 | PASS: 37 项 | **Claude Code 领先** | +| 技能 | PASS: 195 项 | PASS: 37 项 | **Claude Code 领先** | | 钩子 | PASS: 8 种事件类型 | PASS: 11 种事件 | **OpenCode 更多！** | | 规则 | PASS: 29 条 | PASS: 13 条指令 | **Claude Code 领先** | | MCP 服务器 | PASS: 14 个 | PASS: 完整 | **完全对等** | @@ -1242,7 +1242,7 @@ ECC 是**第一个最大化利用每个主要 AI 编码工具的插件**。以 |---------|------------|------------|-----------|----------| | **智能体** | 53 | 共享 (AGENTS.md) | 共享 (AGENTS.md) | 12 | | **命令** | 69 | 共享 | 基于指令 | 31 | -| **技能** | 192 | 共享 | 10 (原生格式) | 37 | +| **技能** | 195 | 共享 | 10 (原生格式) | 37 | | **钩子事件** | 8 种类型 | 15 种类型 | 暂无 | 11 种类型 | | **钩子脚本** | 20+ 个脚本 | 16 个脚本 (DRY 适配器) | N/A | 插件钩子 | | **规则** | 34 (通用 + 语言) | 34 (YAML 前页) | 基于指令 | 13 条指令 | diff --git a/manifests/install-modules.json b/manifests/install-modules.json index a364c1c5..e226cc0f 100644 --- a/manifests/install-modules.json +++ b/manifests/install-modules.json @@ -276,7 +276,10 @@ "paths": [ "skills/deep-research", "skills/exa-search", - "skills/research-ops" + "skills/research-ops", + "skills/scientific-db-pubmed-database", + "skills/scientific-thinking-literature-review", + "skills/scientific-thinking-scholar-evaluation" ], "targets": [ "claude", diff --git a/package.json b/package.json index c8c823b0..df790d8c 100644 --- a/package.json +++ b/package.json @@ -207,6 +207,9 @@ "skills/regex-vs-llm-structured-text/", "skills/remotion-video-creation/", "skills/research-ops/", + "skills/scientific-db-pubmed-database/", + "skills/scientific-thinking-literature-review/", + "skills/scientific-thinking-scholar-evaluation/", "skills/returns-reverse-logistics/", "skills/rust-patterns/", "skills/rust-testing/", diff --git a/skills/scientific-db-pubmed-database/SKILL.md b/skills/scientific-db-pubmed-database/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..44f75a7b --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/scientific-db-pubmed-database/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,175 @@ +--- +name: pubmed-database +description: Direct PubMed and NCBI E-utilities search workflows for biomedical literature, MeSH queries, PMID lookup, citation retrieval, and API-backed literature monitoring. +origin: community +--- + +# PubMed Database + +Use this skill when a task needs biomedical literature from PubMed rather than +general web search. + +## When to Use + +- Searching MEDLINE or life-sciences literature. +- Building PubMed queries with MeSH terms, field tags, dates, or article types. +- Looking up PMIDs, abstracts, publication metadata, or related citations. +- Running systematic-review search passes that need repeatable search strings. +- Using NCBI E-utilities directly from Python, shell, or another HTTP client. + +## Query Construction + +Start with the research question, split it into concepts, then combine concepts +with Boolean operators. + +```text +concept_1 AND concept_2 AND filter +synonym_a OR synonym_b +NOT exclusion_term +``` + +Useful PubMed field tags: + +- `[ti]`: title +- `[ab]`: abstract +- `[tiab]`: title or abstract +- `[au]`: author +- `[ta]`: journal title abbreviation +- `[mh]`: MeSH term +- `[majr]`: major MeSH topic +- `[pt]`: publication type +- `[dp]`: date of publication +- `[la]`: language + +Examples: + +```text +diabetes mellitus[mh] AND treatment[tiab] AND systematic review[pt] AND 2023:2026[dp] +(metformin[nm] OR insulin[nm]) AND diabetes mellitus, type 2[mh] AND randomized controlled trial[pt] +smith ja[au] AND cancer[tiab] AND 2026[dp] AND english[la] +``` + +## MeSH and Subheadings + +Prefer MeSH when the concept has a stable controlled-vocabulary term. Combine +MeSH with title/abstract terms when the topic is new or terminology varies. + +Correct subheading syntax puts the subheading before the field tag: + +```text +diabetes mellitus, type 2/drug therapy[mh] +cardiovascular diseases/prevention & control[mh] +``` + +Use `[majr]` only when the topic must be central to the paper. It can improve +precision but may miss relevant work. + +## Filters + +Publication types: + +- `clinical trial[pt]` +- `meta-analysis[pt]` +- `randomized controlled trial[pt]` +- `review[pt]` +- `systematic review[pt]` +- `guideline[pt]` + +Date filters: + +```text +2026[dp] +2020:2026[dp] +2026/03/15[dp] +``` + +Availability filters: + +```text +free full text[sb] +hasabstract[text] +``` + +## E-utilities Workflow + +NCBI E-utilities supports repeatable API workflows: + +1. `esearch.fcgi`: search and return PMIDs. +2. `esummary.fcgi`: return lightweight article metadata. +3. `efetch.fcgi`: fetch abstracts or full records in XML, MEDLINE, or text. +4. `elink.fcgi`: find related articles and linked resources. + +Use an email and API key for production scripts. Store API keys in environment +variables, never in committed files or command history. + +```python +import os +import time +import requests + +BASE = "https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils" + + +def esearch(query: str, retmax: int = 20) -> list[str]: + params = { + "db": "pubmed", + "term": query, + "retmode": "json", + "retmax": retmax, + "tool": "ecc-pubmed-search", + "email": os.environ.get("NCBI_EMAIL", ""), + } + api_key = os.environ.get("NCBI_API_KEY") + if api_key: + params["api_key"] = api_key + + response = requests.get(f"{BASE}/esearch.fcgi", params=params, timeout=30) + response.raise_for_status() + time.sleep(0.35) + return response.json()["esearchresult"]["idlist"] + + +pmids = esearch("hypertension[mh] AND randomized controlled trial[pt] AND 2024:2026[dp]") +print(pmids) +``` + +For batches, prefer NCBI history server parameters (`usehistory=y`, +`WebEnv`, `query_key`) instead of passing very long PMID lists through URLs. + +## Output Discipline + +For each search pass, record: + +- exact search string +- database searched +- date searched +- filters used +- result count +- export format +- any manual exclusions + +Example: + +```markdown +| Database | Date searched | Query | Filters | Results | +| --- | --- | --- | --- | ---: | +| PubMed | 2026-05-11 | `sickle cell disease[mh] AND CRISPR[tiab]` | 2020:2026[dp], English | 42 | +``` + +## Review Checklist + +- Are field tags valid PubMed tags? +- Are MeSH terms paired with free-text synonyms for newer topics? +- Is the date range explicit and appropriate? +- Does the search log include enough detail to reproduce the query? +- Are API keys loaded from the environment? +- Does HTTP code call `raise_for_status()` or otherwise handle non-200 + responses before parsing? +- Are rate limits respected? + +## References + +- [PubMed help](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/help/) +- [NCBI E-utilities documentation](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK25501/) +- [NCBI API key guidance](https://support.nlm.nih.gov/kbArticle/?pn=KA-05317) +- NCBI support: diff --git a/skills/scientific-thinking-literature-review/SKILL.md b/skills/scientific-thinking-literature-review/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..ca93ff96 --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/scientific-thinking-literature-review/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,192 @@ +--- +name: literature-review +description: Systematic literature-review workflow for academic, biomedical, technical, and scientific topics, including search planning, source screening, synthesis, citation checks, and evidence logging. +origin: community +--- + +# Literature Review + +Use this skill when the task is to find, screen, synthesize, and cite a body of +academic or technical literature. + +## When to Use + +- Building a systematic, scoping, or narrative literature review. +- Synthesizing the state of the art for a research question. +- Finding gaps, contradictions, or future-work directions. +- Preparing citation-backed background sections for papers or reports. +- Comparing evidence across peer-reviewed papers, preprints, patents, and + technical reports. + +## Review Types + +- **Narrative review**: broad synthesis; useful for orientation. +- **Scoping review**: maps concepts, methods, and evidence gaps. +- **Systematic review**: predefined protocol, reproducible search, explicit + screening and exclusion. +- **Meta-analysis**: systematic review plus quantitative effect aggregation. + +Ask the user which level of rigor is needed. If unspecified, default to a +scoping review for exploratory work and a systematic review for publication or +clinical claims. + +## Workflow + +### 1. Define the Question + +Convert the prompt into a searchable research question. + +For clinical or biomedical work, use PICO: + +- Population +- Intervention or exposure +- Comparator +- Outcome + +For technical work, use: + +- system or domain +- method or intervention +- comparison baseline +- evaluation metric + +### 2. Plan the Search + +Create a search protocol before collecting sources: + +- databases to search +- date range +- languages +- publication types +- inclusion criteria +- exclusion criteria +- exact search strings + +Minimum useful database set: + +- PubMed for biomedical and life-sciences literature. +- arXiv for CS, math, physics, quantitative biology, and preprints. +- Semantic Scholar or Crossref for broad academic discovery. +- Domain-specific sources when relevant, such as clinical-trial registries, + patent databases, standards bodies, or official technical docs. + +### 3. Search and Log Evidence + +Keep a search log that makes the review reproducible: + +```markdown +| Database | Date searched | Query | Filters | Results | Export | +| --- | --- | --- | --- | ---: | --- | +| PubMed | 2026-05-11 | `("CRISPR"[tiab] OR "Cas9"[tiab]) AND "sickle cell"[tiab]` | 2020:2026, English | 86 | PMID list | +| arXiv | 2026-05-11 | `CRISPR sickle cell gene editing` | q-bio, 2020:2026 | 9 | BibTeX | +``` + +Save raw IDs, URLs, DOIs, abstracts, and notes separately from the final prose. + +### 4. Deduplicate + +Deduplicate in this order: + +1. DOI +2. PMID or arXiv ID +3. exact title +4. normalized title plus first author and year + +Record how many duplicates were removed. + +### 5. Screen Sources + +Screen in stages: + +1. title +2. abstract +3. full text + +For systematic work, record exclusion reasons: + +- wrong population +- wrong intervention +- wrong outcome +- not primary research +- duplicate +- unavailable full text +- outside date range + +### 6. Extract Data + +Use a structured extraction table: + +```markdown +| Study | Design | Population/Data | Method | Comparator | Outcome | Key finding | Limitations | +| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | +| Author Year | RCT/cohort/review/etc. | sample or corpus | method | baseline | measured outcome | result | caveat | +``` + +For technical papers, include dataset, benchmark, metric, baseline, and +reproducibility notes. + +### 7. Synthesize + +Group evidence by theme rather than summarizing papers one by one. + +Useful synthesis lenses: + +- strongest evidence +- conflicting evidence +- methodological weaknesses +- population or dataset limits +- recency and replication +- practical implications +- unanswered questions + +Separate claims by confidence: + +- **High confidence**: replicated, high-quality evidence across sources. +- **Medium confidence**: plausible but limited by sample, method, or recency. +- **Low confidence**: early, speculative, single-source, or weakly measured. + +### 8. Verify Citations + +Before finalizing: + +- verify DOI, PMID, arXiv ID, or official URL +- check author names and publication year +- do not cite a paper for a claim it does not make +- mark preprints as preprints +- distinguish reviews from primary evidence + +## Output Template + +```markdown +# Literature Review: + +Generated: +Review type: +Search window: +Databases: + +## Research Question + +## Search Strategy + +## Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria + +## Evidence Summary + +## Thematic Synthesis + +## Gaps and Limitations + +## References + +## Search Log +``` + +## Pitfalls + +- Do not treat search snippets as evidence. +- Do not mix preprints, reviews, and primary studies without labeling them. +- Do not omit negative or conflicting findings. +- Do not claim systematic-review rigor without a reproducible protocol. +- Do not use a single database for a broad claim unless the scope is explicitly + limited to that database. diff --git a/skills/scientific-thinking-scholar-evaluation/SKILL.md b/skills/scientific-thinking-scholar-evaluation/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..19a933aa --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/scientific-thinking-scholar-evaluation/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,160 @@ +--- +name: scholar-evaluation +description: Structured scholarly-work evaluation for papers, proposals, literature reviews, methods sections, evidence quality, citation support, and research-writing feedback. +origin: community +--- + +# Scholar Evaluation + +Use this skill to evaluate academic or scientific work with a repeatable rubric. + +## When to Use + +- Reviewing a research paper, proposal, thesis chapter, or literature review. +- Checking whether claims are supported by cited evidence. +- Evaluating methodology, study design, analysis, or limitations. +- Comparing two or more papers for quality or relevance. +- Producing structured feedback for revision. + +## Evaluation Scope + +Start by identifying the artifact: + +- empirical research paper +- theoretical paper +- technical report +- systematic or narrative literature review +- research proposal +- thesis or dissertation chapter +- conference abstract or short paper + +Then choose scope: + +- **comprehensive**: all rubric dimensions +- **targeted**: one or two dimensions, such as method or citations +- **comparative**: rank multiple works against the same rubric + +## Rubric + +Score each applicable dimension from 1 to 5: + +- 5: excellent; clear, rigorous, and publication-ready +- 4: good; minor improvements needed +- 3: adequate; meaningful gaps but usable +- 2: weak; substantial revision needed +- 1: poor; major validity or clarity problems + +Use `N/A` for dimensions that do not apply. + +### 1. Problem and Research Question + +- Is the problem clear and specific? +- Is the contribution meaningful? +- Are scope and assumptions explicit? +- Does the question match the claimed contribution? + +### 2. Literature and Context + +- Is relevant prior work covered? +- Does the work synthesize rather than merely list sources? +- Are gaps accurately identified? +- Are recent and foundational sources balanced? + +### 3. Methodology + +- Does the method answer the research question? +- Are design choices justified? +- Are variables, datasets, participants, or materials described clearly? +- Could another researcher reproduce the work? +- Are ethical and practical constraints acknowledged? + +### 4. Data and Evidence + +- Are data sources credible and appropriate? +- Is sample size or corpus coverage adequate? +- Are inclusion, exclusion, and preprocessing decisions documented? +- Are missing data and bias risks discussed? + +### 5. Analysis + +- Are statistical, qualitative, or computational methods appropriate? +- Are baselines and controls fair? +- Are uncertainty, sensitivity, or robustness checks included when needed? +- Are alternative explanations considered? + +### 6. Results and Interpretation + +- Are results clearly presented? +- Do claims stay within the evidence? +- Are figures, tables, and metrics understandable? +- Are negative or null results handled honestly? + +### 7. Limitations and Threats to Validity + +- Are limitations specific rather than generic? +- Are internal, external, construct, and conclusion-validity risks addressed? +- Does the paper distinguish speculation from demonstrated results? + +### 8. Writing and Structure + +- Is the argument easy to follow? +- Are sections organized around the research question? +- Are definitions and notation clear? +- Is the tone precise and scholarly? + +### 9. Citations + +- Do cited papers support the claims attached to them? +- Are primary sources used where possible? +- Are reviews labeled as reviews? +- Are preprints labeled as preprints? +- Are citation metadata and links correct? + +## Review Process + +1. Read the abstract, introduction, figures, and conclusion for claimed + contribution. +2. Read methods and results for evidence quality. +3. Check the strongest claims against cited sources. +4. Score each applicable dimension. +5. Separate critical blockers from revision suggestions. +6. End with concrete next edits. + +## Output Template + +```markdown +# Scholar Evaluation: + +## Overall Assessment + +- Overall score: <1-5 or N/A> +- Confidence: +- Summary: <3-5 sentences> + +## Dimension Scores + +| Dimension | Score | Evidence | Revision priority | +| --- | ---: | --- | --- | +| Problem and question | | | | +| Literature and context | | | | +| Methodology | | | | +| Data and evidence | | | | +| Analysis | | | | +| Results and interpretation | | | | +| Limitations | | | | +| Writing and structure | | | | +| Citations | | | | + +## Critical Issues + +## Recommended Revisions + +## Evidence Checks Needed +``` + +## Pitfalls + +- Do not use the score as a substitute for concrete feedback. +- Do not penalize a paper for omitting a dimension outside its scope. +- Do not treat citation count, venue, or author reputation as proof of quality. +- Do not accept unsupported claims just because they appear in the abstract.