---

name: sciatlas-idea-evaluate description: Use only SciAtlas search-papers to take a novice user from zero setup to an evidence-grounded evaluation of a research idea's novelty, feasibility, soundness, and differentiation. Trigger when the user asks whether an idea is worth pursuing or needs literature-backed critique.

SciAtlas Idea Evaluate

Use this skill to evaluate a research idea with evidence from search-papers only.

Operating Contract

• Do not call any SciAtlas downstream command. The only SciAtlas retrieval command allowed is search-papers.
• Ask the user only for email, verification code, token, or one necessary clarification.
• Run setup and retrieval yourself where possible.
• Do not expose the full token.

Zero-Start Bootstrap

1. Check whether the sciatlas executable exists without invoking a SciAtlas command: use Get-Command sciatlas -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue on Windows PowerShell or command -v sciatlas on macOS/Linux. Install if missing with python -m pip install -e ./sciatlas or python -m pip install "git+https://github.com/zjunlp/SciAtlas.git#subdirectory=sciatlas".
2. If no SCIATLAS_API_KEY is available, open or provide http://sciatlas.openkg.cn/register.
3. Walk the novice user through registration. Ask for the email verification code when required and the returned sciatlas_xxx token when registration finishes.
4. Configure the shell:

$env:SCIATLAS_API_BASE_URL = "http://sciatlas.openkg.cn"
$env:SCIATLAS_API_KEY = "<token>"
setx SCIATLAS_API_BASE_URL "http://sciatlas.openkg.cn"
setx SCIATLAS_API_KEY "<token>"

export SCIATLAS_API_BASE_URL="http://sciatlas.openkg.cn"
export SCIATLAS_API_KEY="<token>"

5. Use only search-papers for any token smoke test.

Evaluation Frame

Convert the idea into four claims:

• Novelty claim: what is supposed to be new.
• Feasibility claim: why it can be built with available methods/data.
• Soundness claim: why the mechanism should work.
• Differentiation claim: why it is not just a minor variant.

Search Plan

Run only search-papers. Use one direct search and, if needed, one stress-test search:

sciatlas search-papers --retrieval-mode hybrid --query "<research idea>" --keyword "high:<core mechanism>" --keyword "middle:<application domain>" --top-k 8 --top-keywords 0 --max-titles 0 --max-refs 0 --bias-keyword high --bias-related high --bias-citation low --bias-exploration low --ranking-profile precision --report-max-items 8

Stress-test novelty by searching for the closest alternative wording:

sciatlas search-papers --retrieval-mode hybrid --query "<closest competing formulation>" --keyword "high:<problem>" --keyword "middle:<neighbor method>" --top-k 8 --top-keywords 0 --max-titles 0 --max-refs 0 --bias-related high --ranking-profile precision --report-max-items 8

Reading Artifacts

Read report.md and response.json. Build an evaluation ledger:

• Evidence for novelty.
• Evidence against novelty.
• Evidence for feasibility: data, implementation pattern, benchmark, or system precedent.
• Evidence for soundness: theory, empirical result, mechanism, or ablation.
• Missing evidence.

Evaluation Method

Score each dimension as High, Medium, Low, or Unknown:

1. Novelty: High only if close papers solve a different problem or use a meaningfully different mechanism.
2. Feasibility: High only if retrieved work shows required components, data, or evaluation are realistic.
3. Soundness: High only if evidence supports the core causal mechanism, not merely the topic.
4. Differentiation: High only if the idea can be expressed as a clear contrast with closest prior work.

For each score:

• cite the supporting papers from the search result;
• explain the reasoning in plain language;
• state the biggest uncertainty;
• suggest one concrete improvement.

Deliverable

Return:

• Search command(s), with token omitted.
• Evaluation table: novelty, feasibility, soundness, differentiation.
• Closest-prior-art risk.
• Go / revise / no-go recommendation.
• Revised idea statement and next search-papers query.