Quick start¶
The examples assume $skill holds the installed skill directory, as set up in Install:
Fetch one known paper¶
python "$skill/scripts/arp.py" fetch `
--input "https://aclanthology.org/2024.acl-long.1/" `
--output "C:\Research\papers"
Use the output only when the JSON status is delivered. A title alone must first be resolved through discovery; the fetch command will not guess between similarly named papers.
Build a topic corpus¶
A user normally describes the task in plain language and lets the executing agent create the corpus specification. This compact example shows what is made explicit:
schema_version: 1
mode: corpus
name: llm-agent-and-evolutionary-computation
target:
minimum: 20
preferred: 30
maximum: 30
scope:
venues:
- name: "Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)"
short_name: ACL
publisher: ACL
kind: conference
years: [2025]
- name: IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation
short_name: TEVC
publisher: IEEE TEVC
kind: journal
issn: [1089-778X, 1941-0026]
years: [2024, 2025]
years:
include: [2025, 2024]
priority: [2025, 2024]
publication_types:
include: [full, journal-article]
topics:
include:
- large language model multi-agent
- evolutionary optimization
synonyms:
- agent collaboration
- LLM-guided search
exclude:
- editorial
- correction
quotas:
groups:
- name: ACL
minimum: 10
venues:
- "Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)"
- name: TEVC
minimum: 10
venues:
- IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation
delivery:
require_pdf: true
require_official_bibtex: true
export_markdown: false
profile: numbered
naming_template: "papers/{publisher}/{number}.{ext}"
Run discovery first:
python "$skill/scripts/arp.py" discover corpus --progress `
--spec .\corpus.yaml --output C:\Research\corpus-run
The executing agent then reads evidence-packets.jsonl, reviews title and abstract evidence, and writes hash-bound decisions. Import those decisions and freeze the selection:
python "$skill/scripts/arp.py" review corpus `
--run C:\Research\corpus-run `
--decisions C:\Research\corpus-run\review-decisions.jsonl
Acquire only the frozen selection:
python "$skill/scripts/arp.py" acquire corpus `
--selection C:\Research\corpus-run\selection-manifest.json `
--output C:\Research\corpus-delivery
Corpus discovery explains each stage and the pending states you will see.
Prepare a literature-research run¶
schema_version: 1
mode: research
question_type: gap-analysis
research_question: Has prior work jointly optimized this scenario and mechanism?
work_under_review:
scenario: multi-agent edge computing
mechanism: LLM-guided evolutionary optimization
decisions: [task allocation, agent communication]
objectives: [latency, solution quality]
constraints: [limited communication budget]
seed_papers: []
analysis:
max_full_text_papers: 20
graph_seed_limit: 3
graph_neighbors_per_direction: 25
scope:
years: [2023, 2024, 2025, 2026]
delivery:
write_narrative: false
export_markdown: false
python "$skill/scripts/arp.py" discover research `
--brief .\research-brief.yaml --output C:\Research\literature-review
Discovery returns status: review_required. Read its saturation_signals and next_actions first: they say whether to broaden the brief or widen the citation graph before review (see literature research). The executing agent then reviews the hash-bound candidates, freezes the closest papers, acquires their official files, reads the MinerU parses, and imports evidence:
python "$skill/scripts/arp.py" review research `
--run C:\Research\literature-review --decisions .\research-review.jsonl
python "$skill/scripts/arp.py" acquire research `
--run C:\Research\literature-review
python "$skill/scripts/arp.py" evidence research `
--run C:\Research\literature-review --records .\evidence-review.jsonl
The review and evidence JSONL files are produced by the executing agent from the immutable packets and parsed full text, using the public schemas in schemas/. A final status: complete means every paper in the frozen closest-paper set was reviewed; it does not claim that every paper in the world was found or that novelty is universally proven.