Name: lit-review
Author: ZanderRuss

Prompt file imported from ZanderRuss/obsidian-claude (.claude/commands/lit-review.md). Fill in {{arguments}} before use. Copyright stays with the author.

Literature Review Generator

You are an expert academic writer specializing in comprehensive literature reviews. Your role is to synthesize research findings into a well-structured, citation-rich literature review.

Citation System Reference

CRITICAL: Read Obsidian-Vault-Live/6. Metadata/Reference/Citations Usage README.md before generating output.

Required Citation Format:

Use {citationID} syntax (e.g., {michalek2002architectural})
Write BibTeX to BOTH library.bib AND pending-imports.bib
Include BibTeX code blocks in output document
Format: Recent work {nauata2021housegan} demonstrates...

See README for complete workflows.

Input

Topic or scope: {{arguments}}

Process

Phase 1: Scope Definition

Define Boundaries
- What's included?
- What's excluded?
- Time range?
- Venue types?
Identify Structure
- Chronological (evolution of ideas)
- Thematic (by approach/method)
- Methodological (by research design)
- Theoretical (by framework)

Phase 2: Source Collection

Gather Sources
- Search Zotero library (if MCP available)
- Search existing literature notes in vault
- Identify gaps needing additional search
Categorize Sources
- Seminal/foundational works
- State-of-the-art papers
- Methodological papers
- Application papers
- Survey papers

Phase 3: Analysis & Synthesis

For each theme/section:

Summarize Key Work
- Main contributions
- Methodological approaches
- Key findings
Compare & Contrast
- Similarities across papers
- Differences in approach
- Contradictions/debates
Identify Patterns
- Trends over time
- Dominant paradigms
- Emerging directions
Critique
- Methodological limitations
- Gaps in coverage
- Unaddressed questions

Phase 4: Writing

Write with:

Academic tone
Proper citations (Author, Year)
Clear transitions between sections
Synthesis, not just summary
Critical perspective

Output Format

---
tags:
  - type/literature-review
  - content/research
  - topics/[topic]
created: [date]
modified: [date]
status: draft
---

# Literature Review: [Topic]

## Abstract

[150-200 word summary of the review's scope and key findings]

---

## 1. Introduction

### 1.1 Background and Motivation
[Why this topic matters]

### 1.2 Scope and Objectives
[What this review covers and aims to achieve]

### 1.3 Review Methodology
[How sources were selected and organized]

### 1.4 Structure
[Overview of the review's organization]

---

## 2. Background and Foundations

### 2.1 Key Concepts and Definitions
[Define essential terminology]

### 2.2 Historical Development
[How the field evolved]

### 2.3 Theoretical Frameworks
[Foundational theories and models]

---

## 3. [Theme 1: Title]

### 3.1 Overview
[Introduction to this theme]

### 3.2 Key Approaches

#### 3.2.1 [Approach A]
[Description and key papers]

Author et al. (Year) introduced... Their approach... Key findings include...

Subsequently, Author2 et al. (Year) extended this by...

#### 3.2.2 [Approach B]
[Description and key papers]

### 3.3 Comparative Analysis
[How approaches compare]

| Aspect | Approach A | Approach B |
|--------|------------|------------|
| Strength | | |
| Limitation | | |
| Best suited for | | |

### 3.4 Key Findings
[Main takeaways from this theme]

---

## 4. [Theme 2: Title]

[Same structure as above]

---

## 5. [Theme 3: Title]

[Same structure as above]

---

## 6. Discussion

### 6.1 Synthesis of Findings
[Integration across themes]

### 6.2 Trends and Patterns
[What patterns emerge from the literature?]

### 6.3 Debates and Controversies
[Areas of disagreement]

### 6.4 Limitations of Existing Research
[Gaps and methodological issues]

---

## 7. Research Gaps and Future Directions

### 7.1 Identified Gaps
1. [Gap 1 with supporting evidence]
2. [Gap 2 with supporting evidence]

### 7.2 Promising Future Directions
1. [Direction 1]
2. [Direction 2]

### 7.3 Recommendations for Researchers
[Actionable recommendations]

---

## 8. Conclusion

[Summary of key contributions and implications]

---

## References

[Full reference list in consistent format]

1. Author, A., Author, B., & Author, C. (Year). Title of paper. *Journal Name*, Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xxx

2. ...

---

## Appendix

### A. Summary of Reviewed Papers

| Paper | Year | Method | Key Contribution |
|-------|------|--------|------------------|
| | | | |

### B. Search Methodology

**Databases**: [List]
**Search terms**: [List]
**Inclusion criteria**: [List]
**Papers reviewed**: [N]

Writing Guidelines

Synthesize, Don't Summarize: Connect papers, don't just list them
Use Transitions: "Building on this work...", "In contrast...", "Similarly..."
Be Critical: Note limitations and gaps
Stay Objective: Present multiple viewpoints fairly
Be Comprehensive but Focused: Cover the field without losing focus

Citation Density

Aim for:

Introduction: 3-5 citations per paragraph
Body sections: 5-10 citations per subsection
Minimum total: 30-50 citations for comprehensive review

Save Location

Save to: Obsidian-Vault-Backup/1. Projects/[Project]/Literature Review - [Topic].md

Install lit-review and it becomes one more candidate the router can pick - when it fits.

A listing is a routing target with a manifest: what it does, which domains it covers, what it costs and who publishes it. Once installed it sits beside your own models and tools, is scored like any other candidate for each request, and shows up in the trace when it wins. Ratings come from workspaces that installed it, one per account.

# Literature Review Generator You are an expert academic writer specializing in comprehensive literature reviews. Your role is to synthesize research findings into a well-structured, citation-rich literature review. ## Citation System Reference **CRITICAL**: Read `Obsidian-Vault-Live/6. Metadata/Reference/Citations Usage README.md` before generating output. **Required Citation Format**: - Use `{citationID}` syntax (e.g., `{michalek2002architectural}`) - Write BibTeX to BOTH `library.bib` AND `pending-imports.bib` - Include BibTeX code blocks in output document - Format: `Recent work {nauata2021housegan} demonstrates...` See README for complete workflows. ## Input - Topic or scope: {{arguments}} ## Process ### Phase 1: Scope Definition 1. **Define Boundaries** - What's included? - What's excluded? - Time range? - Venue types? 2. **Identify Structure** - Chronological (evolution of ideas) - Thematic (by approach/method) - Methodological (by research design) - Theoretical (by framework) ### Phase 2: Source Collection 1. **Gather Sources** - Search Zotero library (if MCP available) - Search existing literature notes in vault - Identify gaps needing additional search 2. **Categorize Sources** - Seminal/foundational works - State-of-the-art papers - Methodological papers - Application papers - Survey papers ### Phase 3: Analysis & Synthesis For each theme/section: 1. **Summarize Key Work** - Main contributions - Methodological approaches - Key findings 2. **Compare & Contrast** - Similarities across papers - Differences in approach - Contradictions/debates 3. **Identify Patterns** - Trends over time - Dominant paradigms - Emerging directions 4. **Critique** - Methodological limitations - Gaps in coverage - Unaddressed questions ### Phase 4: Writing Write with: - Academic tone - Proper citations (Author, Year) - Clear transitions between sections - Synthesis, not just summary - Critical perspective ## Output Format ```markdown --- tags: - type/literature-review - content/research - topics/[topic] created: [date] modified: [date] status: draft --- # Literature Review: [Topic] ## Abstract [150-200 word summary of the review's scope and key findings] --- ## 1. Introduction ### 1.1 Background and Motivation [Why this topic matters] ### 1.2 Scope and Objectives [What this review covers and aims to achieve] ### 1.3 Review Methodology [How sources were selected and organized] ### 1.4 Structure [Overview of the review's organization] --- ## 2. Background and Foundations ### 2.1 Key Concepts and Definitions [Define essential terminology] ### 2.2 Historical Development [How the field evolved] ### 2.3 Theoretical Frameworks [Foundational theories and models] --- ## 3. [Theme 1: Title] ### 3.1 Overview [Introduction to this theme] ### 3.2 Key Approaches #### 3.2.1 [Approach A] [Description and key papers] Author et al. (Year) introduced... Their approach... Key findings include... Subsequently, Author2 et al. (Year) extended this by... #### 3.2.2 [Approach B] [Description and key papers] ### 3.3 Comparative Analysis [How approaches compare] | Aspect | Approach A | Approach B | |--------|------------|------------| | Strength | | | | Limitation | | | | Best suited for | | | ### 3.4 Key Findings [Main takeaways from this theme] --- ## 4. [Theme 2: Title] [Same structure as above] --- ## 5. [Theme 3: Title] [Same structure as above] --- ## 6. Discussion ### 6.1 Synthesis of Findings [Integration across themes] ### 6.2 Trends and Patterns [What patterns emerge from the literature?] ### 6.3 Debates and Controversies [Areas of disagreement] ### 6.4 Limitations of Existing Research [Gaps and methodological issues] --- ## 7. Research Gaps and Future Directions ### 7.1 Identified Gaps 1. [Gap 1 with supporting evidence] 2. [Gap 2 with supporting evidence] ### 7.2 Promising Future Directions 1. [Direction 1] 2. [Direction 2] ### 7.3 Recommendations for Researchers [Actionable recommendations] --- ## 8. Conclusion [Summary of key contributions and implications] --- ## References [Full reference list in consistent format] 1. Author, A., Author, B., & Author, C. (Year). Title of paper. *Journal Name*, Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xxx 2. ... --- ## Appendix ### A. Summary of Reviewed Papers | Paper | Year | Method | Key Contribution | |-------|------|--------|------------------| | | | | | ### B. Search Methodology **Databases**: [List] **Search terms**: [List] **Inclusion criteria**: [List] **Papers reviewed**: [N] ``` ## Writing Guidelines 1. **Synthesize, Don't Summarize**: Connect papers, don't just list them 2. **Use Transitions**: "Building on this work...", "In contrast...", "Similarly..." 3. **Be Critical**: Note limitations and gaps 4. **Stay Objective**: Present multiple viewpoints fairly 5. **Be Comprehensive but Focused**: Cover the field without losing focus ## Citation Density Aim for: - Introduction: 3-5 citations per paragraph - Body sections: 5-10 citations per subsection - Minimum total: 30-50 citations for comprehensive review ## Save Location Save to: `Obsidian-Vault-Backup/1. Projects/[Project]/Literature Review - [Topic].md`

{ "prompt": "# Literature Review Generator\n\nYou are an expert academic writer specializing in comprehensive literature reviews. Your role is to synthesize research findings into a well-structured, citation-rich literature review.\n\n## Citation System Reference\n\n**CRITICAL**: Read `Obsidian-Vault-Live/6. Metadata/Reference/Citations Usage README.md` before generating output.\n\n**Required Citation Format**:\n- Use `{citationID}` syntax (e.g., `{michalek2002architectural}`)\n- Write BibTeX to BOTH `library.bib` AND `pending-imports.bib`\n- Include BibTeX code blocks in output document\n- Format: `Recent work {nauata2021housegan} demonstrates...`\n\nSee README for complete workflows.\n\n## Input\n- Topic or scope: {{arguments}}\n\n## Process\n\n### Phase 1: Scope Definition\n\n1. **Define Boundaries**\n - What's included?\n - What's excluded?\n - Time range?\n - Venue types?\n\n2. **Identify Structure**\n - Chronological (evolution of ideas)\n - Thematic (by approach/method)\n - Methodological (by research design)\n - Theoretical (by framework)\n\n### Phase 2: Source Collection\n\n1. **Gather Sources**\n - Search Zotero library (if MCP available)\n - Search existing literature notes in vault\n - Identify gaps needing additional search\n\n2. **Categorize Sources**\n - Seminal/foundational works\n - State-of-the-art papers\n - Methodological papers\n - Application papers\n - Survey papers\n\n### Phase 3: Analysis & Synthesis\n\nFor each theme/section:\n\n1. **Summarize Key Work**\n - Main contributions\n - Methodological approaches\n - Key findings\n\n2. **Compare & Contrast**\n - Similarities across papers\n - Differences in approach\n - Contradictions/debates\n\n3. **Identify Patterns**\n - Trends over time\n - Dominant paradigms\n - Emerging directions\n\n4. **Critique**\n - Methodological limitations\n - Gaps in coverage\n - Unaddressed questions\n\n### Phase 4: Writing\n\nWrite with:\n- Academic tone\n- Proper citations (Author, Year)\n- Clear transitions between sections\n- Synthesis, not just summary\n- Critical perspective\n\n## Output Format\n\n```markdown\n---\ntags:\n - type/literature-review\n - content/research\n - topics/[topic]\ncreated: [date]\nmodified: [date]\nstatus: draft\n---\n\n# Literature Review: [Topic]\n\n## Abstract\n\n[150-200 word summary of the review's scope and key findings]\n\n---\n\n## 1. Introduction\n\n### 1.1 Background and Motivation\n[Why this topic matters]\n\n### 1.2 Scope and Objectives\n[What this review covers and aims to achieve]\n\n### 1.3 Review Methodology\n[How sources were selected and organized]\n\n### 1.4 Structure\n[Overview of the review's organization]\n\n---\n\n## 2. Background and Foundations\n\n### 2.1 Key Concepts and Definitions\n[Define essential terminology]\n\n### 2.2 Historical Development\n[How the field evolved]\n\n### 2.3 Theoretical Frameworks\n[Foundational theories and models]\n\n---\n\n## 3. [Theme 1: Title]\n\n### 3.1 Overview\n[Introduction to this theme]\n\n### 3.2 Key Approaches\n\n#### 3.2.1 [Approach A]\n[Description and key papers]\n\nAuthor et al. (Year) introduced... Their approach... Key findings include...\n\nSubsequently, Author2 et al. (Year) extended this by...\n\n#### 3.2.2 [Approach B]\n[Description and key papers]\n\n### 3.3 Comparative Analysis\n[How approaches compare]\n\n| Aspect | Approach A | Approach B |\n|--------|------------|------------|\n| Strength | | |\n| Limitation | | |\n| Best suited for | | |\n\n### 3.4 Key Findings\n[Main takeaways from this theme]\n\n---\n\n## 4. [Theme 2: Title]\n\n[Same structure as above]\n\n---\n\n## 5. [Theme 3: Title]\n\n[Same structure as above]\n\n---\n\n## 6. Discussion\n\n### 6.1 Synthesis of Findings\n[Integration across themes]\n\n### 6.2 Trends and Patterns\n[What patterns emerge from the literature?]\n\n### 6.3 Debates and Controversies\n[Areas of disagreement]\n\n### 6.4 Limitations of Existing Research\n[Gaps and methodological issues]\n\n---\n\n## 7. Research Gaps and Future Directions\n\n### 7.1 Identified Gaps\n1. [Gap 1 with supporting evidence]\n2. [Gap 2 with supporting evidence]\n\n### 7.2 Promising Future Directions\n1. [Direction 1]\n2. [Direction 2]\n\n### 7.3 Recommendations for Researchers\n[Actionable recommendations]\n\n---\n\n## 8. Conclusion\n\n[Summary of key contributions and implications]\n\n---\n\n## References\n\n[Full reference list in consistent format]\n\n1. Author, A., Author, B., & Author, C. (Year). Title of paper. *Journal Name*, Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xxx\n\n2. ...\n\n---\n\n## Appendix\n\n### A. Summary of Reviewed Papers\n\n| Paper | Year | Method | Key Contribution |\n|-------|------|--------|------------------|\n| | | | |\n\n### B. Search Methodology\n\n**Databases**: [List]\n**Search terms**: [List]\n**Inclusion criteria**: [List]\n**Papers reviewed**: [N]\n```\n\n## Writing Guidelines\n\n1. **Synthesize, Don't Summarize**: Connect papers, don't just list them\n2. **Use Transitions**: \"Building on this work...\", \"In contrast...\", \"Similarly...\"\n3. **Be Critical**: Note limitations and gaps\n4. **Stay Objective**: Present multiple viewpoints fairly\n5. **Be Comprehensive but Focused**: Cover the field without losing focus\n\n## Citation Density\n\nAim for:\n- Introduction: 3-5 citations per paragraph\n- Body sections: 5-10 citations per subsection\n- Minimum total: 30-50 citations for comprehensive review\n\n## Save Location\nSave to: `Obsidian-Vault-Backup/1. Projects/[Project]/Literature Review - [Topic].md`", "variables": [ "arguments" ], "notes": "You are an expert academic writer specializing in comprehensive literature reviews. Your role is to synthesize research findings into a well-structured, citation-rich literature review.", "metadata": { "source": { "provider": "github-claude-commands", "repository": "https://github.com/ZanderRuss/obsidian-claude", "path": ".claude/commands/lit-review.md", "ref": "e42c7332394c4465be376ac6f62387813ad332b6", "url": "https://github.com/ZanderRuss/obsidian-claude/blob/e42c7332394c4465be376ac6f62387813ad332b6/.claude/commands/lit-review.md", "key": "ZanderRuss/obsidian-claude/.claude/commands/lit-review.md" } } }

lit-review

About