@compilr-dev/sdk 0.5.5 → 0.5.7

package/dist/index.d.ts

@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ export type { AskUserQuestion, AskUserInput, AskUserResult, AskUserHandler, AskU
 export { createPlatformTools, createProjectTools, createWorkItemTools, createDocumentTools, createPlanTools, createBacklogTools, createAnchorTools, createArtifactTools, createEpisodeTools, ProjectAnchorStore, } from './platform/index.js';
 export type { ProjectAnchorStoreConfig } from './platform/index.js';
 export { STEP_ORDER, GUIDED_STEP_CRITERIA, getNextStep, isValidTransition, getStepCriteria, formatStepDisplay, getStepNumber, } from './platform/index.js';
-export { platformSkills, designSkill, sketchSkill, prdSkill, refineSkill, refineItemSkill, architectureSkill, sessionNotesSkill, buildSkill, scaffoldSkill, outlineSkill, } from './skills/index.js';
+export { platformSkills, designSkill, sketchSkill, prdSkill, refineSkill, refineItemSkill, architectureSkill, sessionNotesSkill, buildSkill, scaffoldSkill, outlineSkill, literatureReviewSkill, draftSectionSkill, } from './skills/index.js';
 export { ACTION_REGISTRY, getActionsForContext, getActionById, resolveActionPrompt, buildContextSummary, getSuggestedRole, } from './actions/index.js';
 export type { ActionContext, ActionDefinition } from './actions/index.js';
 export { PROJECT_TYPES, getProjectTypeConfig, getProjectTypesByCategory, generalConfig, softwareConfig, researchConfig, businessPlanConfig, contentConfig, techDocsConfig, courseConfig, } from './project-types/index.js';

package/dist/index.js

@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ export { STEP_ORDER, GUIDED_STEP_CRITERIA, getNextStep, isValidTransition, getSt
 // =============================================================================
 // Platform Skills (platform-specific prompt expansions)
 // =============================================================================
-export { platformSkills, designSkill, sketchSkill, prdSkill, refineSkill, refineItemSkill, architectureSkill, sessionNotesSkill, buildSkill, scaffoldSkill, outlineSkill, } from './skills/index.js';
+export { platformSkills, designSkill, sketchSkill, prdSkill, refineSkill, refineItemSkill, architectureSkill, sessionNotesSkill, buildSkill, scaffoldSkill, outlineSkill, literatureReviewSkill, draftSectionSkill, } from './skills/index.js';
 // =============================================================================
 // Contextual Actions (skill invocations with context)
 // =============================================================================

package/dist/project-types/configs.js

@@ -154,8 +154,8 @@ export const researchConfig = {
         { type: 'bibliography', label: 'Bibliography', description: 'References and citations' },
         { type: 'session-notes', label: 'Session Notes', description: 'Summary of work done' },
     ],
-    projectActions: ['outline', 'session-notes'],
-    workItemActions: ['explain'],
+    projectActions: ['outline', 'literature-review', 'draft-section', 'session-notes'],
+    workItemActions: ['draft-section', 'explain'],
     workItemLabels: {
         feature: { short: 'SC', full: 'Section' },
         bug: { short: 'RV', full: 'Revision' },

package/dist/skills/index.d.ts

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
 /**
  * Platform Skills — barrel export
  */
-export { platformSkills, designSkill, sketchSkill, prdSkill, refineSkill, refineItemSkill, architectureSkill, sessionNotesSkill, buildSkill, scaffoldSkill, outlineSkill, } from './platform-skills.js';
+export { platformSkills, designSkill, sketchSkill, prdSkill, refineSkill, refineItemSkill, architectureSkill, sessionNotesSkill, buildSkill, scaffoldSkill, outlineSkill, literatureReviewSkill, draftSectionSkill, } from './platform-skills.js';

package/dist/skills/index.js

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
 /**
  * Platform Skills — barrel export
  */
-export { platformSkills, designSkill, sketchSkill, prdSkill, refineSkill, refineItemSkill, architectureSkill, sessionNotesSkill, buildSkill, scaffoldSkill, outlineSkill, } from './platform-skills.js';
+export { platformSkills, designSkill, sketchSkill, prdSkill, refineSkill, refineItemSkill, architectureSkill, sessionNotesSkill, buildSkill, scaffoldSkill, outlineSkill, literatureReviewSkill, draftSectionSkill, } from './platform-skills.js';

package/dist/skills/platform-skills.d.ts

@@ -18,8 +18,10 @@ export declare const sessionNotesSkill: Skill;
 export declare const buildSkill: Skill;
 export declare const scaffoldSkill: Skill;
 export declare const outlineSkill: Skill;
+export declare const literatureReviewSkill: Skill;
+export declare const draftSectionSkill: Skill;
 /**
- * All platform-specific skills (10 total).
+ * All platform-specific skills (11 total).
  * These skills reference platform tools (backlog, workitems, documents, projects)
  * and belong in the SDK rather than in generic agent/coding libraries.
  */

package/dist/skills/platform-skills.js

@@ -990,11 +990,227 @@ Create one work item per section:
 ✓ User has reviewed and approved the outline`,
     tags: ['research', 'planning', 'outline'],
 });
+export const literatureReviewSkill = defineSkill({
+    name: 'literature-review',
+    description: 'Analyze sources from the Knowledge Base — extract findings, link to claims, identify gaps',
+    prompt: `You are in LITERATURE REVIEW MODE. Your goal is to systematically analyze the sources in the Knowledge Base and connect them to the Research Model's sections and claims.
+
+## When to Use
+- Sources have been added to the Knowledge Base but not yet analyzed
+- The Research Model has sections/claims that need source support
+- User wants to understand how sources relate to their argument
+- User wants to identify gaps in their source coverage
+
+## Prerequisites
+- A Research Model should exist (run /outline first if not)
+- Sources should be in the Knowledge Base (upload PDFs, paste text, or import URLs)
+
+## Step 1: Assess Current State
+
+1. Use \`research_model_get\` with scope: "overview" to see the current model
+2. Use \`research_model_get\` with scope: "sources" to see which sources are already registered and analyzed
+3. Review the Knowledge Base content (pinned items are in context; read non-pinned files as needed)
+
+Report to the user:
+- "You have X sources in the model, Y analyzed, Z unanalyzed"
+- "The Knowledge Base has N files available"
+- "X claims currently lack source support"
+
+## Step 2: Register New Sources
+
+For each KB document not yet in the Research Model:
+1. Read the document content (use \`read_file\` if not pinned)
+2. Extract citation information: authors, title, year, venue, type
+3. Register it: \`research_model_update\` with op: "source_add", source: { citeKey, citation: { type, title, authors, year, venue } }
+4. Note: generate a short, memorable citeKey (e.g., "smith2024", "jones-ml-2023")
+
+Ask the user to confirm the extracted citation info for each source, or batch-confirm if there are many.
+
+## Step 3: Analyze Each Source
+
+For each unanalyzed source:
+1. Read the full content from the KB
+2. Extract key findings relevant to the paper's research questions
+3. Identify the source's methodology and limitations
+4. Determine relevance: primary (directly addresses research questions), secondary (provides context), or background (general knowledge)
+5. Update the source: \`research_model_update\` with op: "source_update", sourceId: "...", updates: { keyFindings: [...], relevance: "primary|secondary|background", analyzed: true, tags: [...] }
+
+Present a summary of each source's key findings to the user.
+
+## Step 4: Link Sources to Claims
+
+For each section in the model:
+1. Read the section's existing claims (\`research_model_get\` with sectionId)
+2. For each claim, identify which analyzed sources support or contradict it
+3. Link them: \`research_model_update\` with op: "claim_link_source", sectionId, claimId, sourceRef: { sourceId, relevance: "brief note" }, relation: "supporting" or "contradicting"
+4. Update evidence strength based on the linked sources:
+   - strong: multiple supporting sources, no contradictions
+   - moderate: at least one supporting source
+   - weak: tangential support only
+   - contested: sources disagree
+   - unsupported: no sources linked
+
+If a source suggests a claim that doesn't exist yet, propose adding it:
+- \`research_model_update\` with op: "claim_add", sectionId, claim: { statement, type: "derived" }
+
+## Step 5: Identify Gaps
+
+After linking sources to claims, analyze gaps:
+1. Run \`research_model_validate\` to get warnings
+2. Report:
+   - **Unsupported claims** — claims with no source references (need more sources or should be marked as original analysis)
+   - **Orphan sources** — sources not linked to any claim (may not be relevant, or claims are missing)
+   - **Thin sections** — sections with few claims or few sources
+   - **Missing perspectives** — if all sources agree, note the lack of counter-arguments
+
+Suggest next steps:
+- "Section X needs more sources on [topic] — consider searching for..."
+- "Source Y has findings relevant to Section Z but no claim captures this yet"
+- "The paper lacks counter-arguments on [claim] — consider adding a limitations discussion"
+
+## Step 6: Synthesize Themes
+
+If multiple sources have been analyzed, provide a thematic synthesis:
+- Group sources by the themes they address
+- Note where sources agree, where they disagree, and what's novel
+- Map themes to research questions
+- Suggest how themes should be organized in the Literature Review section
+
+## Rules
+- Analyze sources ONE AT A TIME — don't rush through multiple sources
+- Ask the user to confirm citation info before saving (batch OK for many sources)
+- Always distinguish between the source's claims and the user's interpretation
+- Note methodological differences between sources when relevant
+- Use citeKeys consistently when referencing sources
+- If a source is irrelevant to the research, say so — not every KB file needs to be in the model
+- Keep evidence strength assessments conservative — "moderate" is better than over-claiming "strong"
+
+## Completion Criteria
+✓ All relevant KB sources are registered in the model
+✓ Each source has been analyzed (keyFindings, relevance, tags)
+✓ Sources are linked to relevant claims
+✓ Evidence strength updated for linked claims
+✓ Gaps identified and reported
+✓ User has reviewed the source-claim mappings`,
+    tags: ['research', 'analysis', 'sources'],
+});
+export const draftSectionSkill = defineSkill({
+    name: 'draft-section',
+    description: 'Draft a paper section using the outline, claims, and linked sources',
+    prompt: `You are in DRAFT SECTION MODE. Your goal is to write or revise a section of the research paper, guided by the Research Model's outline, claims, and linked sources.
+
+## When to Use
+- A section has status "outlined" and needs its first draft
+- A section needs revision based on reviewer feedback
+- The user wants to expand a section with more detail
+
+## Step 1: Select the Section
+
+1. Use \`research_model_get\` with scope: "sections" to see all sections and their status
+2. If the user didn't specify which section, suggest the next logical one:
+   - Methodology first (grounds the paper)
+   - Literature Review (needed early)
+   - Results / Findings (core content)
+   - Discussion (interpretation)
+   - Introduction and Conclusion last (summaries)
+3. Confirm the section choice with the user
+
+## Step 2: Gather Section Context
+
+For the chosen section:
+1. Use \`research_model_get\` with sectionId to get the section's purpose, claims, and notes
+2. Read any existing draft file (if the section has been drafted before)
+3. For each claim with linked sources, read the source content from KB to understand the evidence
+4. Check the citation style from the model: \`research_model_get\` with scope: "overview"
+
+Summarize to the user:
+- "Section: {title}"
+- "Purpose: {purpose}"
+- "Claims to address: {list}"
+- "Sources available: {list with citeKeys}"
+
+## Step 3: Draft the Section
+
+Write the section following these guidelines:
+
+**Structure:**
+- Start with a topic sentence that states the section's purpose
+- Address each claim in the section in a logical order
+- Use transitions between paragraphs
+- End with a connection to the next section (or summary for final sections)
+
+**Citations:**
+- Use the project's citation style for in-text citations
+- APA: (Author, Year) or Author (Year)
+- MLA: (Author Page) or Author (Page)
+- IEEE: [citeKey] or [N]
+- Chicago: (Author Year) or Author (Year)
+- Harvard: (Author Year) or Author (Year)
+- Cite sources for every non-original claim
+- When multiple sources support a claim, cite them together
+
+**Academic Tone:**
+- Formal but clear — avoid jargon without definition
+- Use hedging language where appropriate ("suggests", "indicates", "appears to")
+- Distinguish between established facts and interpretations
+- Use active voice for the author's contributions, passive for general findings
+
+**Length:**
+- Respect the section's targetWordCount if set
+- If not set, aim for appropriate length based on scope:
+  - Journal article section: 500-1500 words
+  - Thesis chapter: 2000-5000 words
+  - Literature review section: 800-2000 words
+
+## Step 4: Write the File
+
+1. Determine the file path: \`{project_path}/sections/{section_order}-{section_slug}.md\`
+   - e.g., \`sections/01-introduction.md\`, \`sections/03-methodology.md\`
+2. Write the draft using \`write_file\` or \`edit_file\` (if revising)
+3. Include a header comment: \`<!-- Section: {title} | Status: drafted | Rev: {model revision} -->\`
+
+## Step 5: Update the Model
+
+After writing:
+1. Update section status: \`research_model_update\` with op: "section_update", sectionId, updates: { status: "drafted", actualWordCount: N }
+2. If new claims emerged during writing, add them: \`research_model_update\` with op: "claim_add"
+3. If evidence strength changed based on closer reading, update claims
+
+## Step 6: Generate Bibliography (if needed)
+
+If this is the first section being drafted or the user requests it:
+1. Use \`bibliography_generate\` with format: "markdown" to produce the references list
+2. Write it to \`{project_path}/sections/references.md\`
+
+## Step 7: Summary
+
+Report to the user:
+- Section drafted: title, word count, file path
+- Claims addressed: list with evidence strength
+- Citations used: list of citeKeys
+- Suggestions: any gaps noticed, claims that need more support
+
+## Rules
+- NEVER fabricate citations — only cite sources that exist in the Research Model
+- If a claim lacks source support, note it explicitly rather than inventing a reference
+- Maintain consistency with previously drafted sections (terminology, tense, voice)
+- If the section has subsections in the model, draft them as ## subheadings
+- Read existing drafted sections first to maintain consistent style
+- Ask the user about tone preferences if this is the first section being drafted
+
+## Completion Criteria
+✓ Section file written with proper citations
+✓ Model updated (status: drafted, actualWordCount)
+✓ All claims in the section are addressed in the text
+✓ In-text citations match the project's citation style
+✓ User has reviewed the draft`,
+    tags: ['research', 'writing', 'drafting'],
+});
 // =============================================================================
 // Aggregate export
 // =============================================================================
 /**
- * All platform-specific skills (10 total).
+ * All platform-specific skills (11 total).
  * These skills reference platform tools (backlog, workitems, documents, projects)
  * and belong in the SDK rather than in generic agent/coding libraries.
  */
@@ -1009,4 +1225,6 @@ export const platformSkills = [
     buildSkill,
     scaffoldSkill,
     outlineSkill,
+    literatureReviewSkill,
+    draftSectionSkill,
 ];

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@compilr-dev/sdk",
-  "version": "0.5.5",
+  "version": "0.5.7",
   "description": "Universal agent runtime for building AI-powered applications",
   "type": "module",
   "main": "dist/index.js",