Command
analyze-interviews
Analyze qualitative interview transcripts. Generates structured summaries, thematic codes, cross-case analysis, and evidence tables. Solves context-window…
@tobiasblaskView CommandContent
Command
/triage-project
Strategic project triage — should you continue, pivot, or kill your current research project? Evaluates 5 signals (results, competition, impact, effort, motivation) and delivers a clear Continue/Pivot/Kill recommendation. For Pivot: suggests concrete new framing. For Kill:
Install
> /plugin marketplace add TobiasBlask/open-paper-machine > /plugin install open-academic-paper-machine@open-paper-machine
How it fires
How this command gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfClaude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/triage-project
Context preview
What this command does when you run it.
Strategic project triage — should you continue, pivot, or kill your current research project? Evaluates 5 signals (results, competition, impact, effort, motivation) and delivers a clear Continue/Pivot/Kill recommendation. For Pivot: suggests concrete new framing. For Kill:
Command definition
triage-project.mddescription: >
Strategic project triage — should you continue, pivot, or kill your current research
project? Evaluates 5 signals (results, competition, impact, effort, motivation) and
delivers a clear Continue/Pivot/Kill recommendation. For Pivot: suggests concrete new
framing. For Kill: suggests what to salvage.
allowed_tools:
- Agent
- Read
- Write
- Glob
- Grep
- Bash
- WebSearch
- WebFetch
- mcp__academic-search__academic_search_all
- mcp__academic-search__academic_search_semantic_scholar
- mcp__academic-search__academic_search_arxiv
user_invocable: true
/triage-project — Should You Continue This Project?
Read `agents/research-strategist.md` and execute **Mode 1: Project Triage**.
The user describes their current research project and its state. Evaluate using 5 signals:
| Signal | Continue | Pivot | Kill | |--------|----------|-------|------| | Results | Core hypothesis validated | Interesting side results | Core assumption disproven | | Competition | Still ahead or unique angle | Others approaching differently | Scooped on main contribution | | Impact | Conclusion-first test passes | Original framing weak, results support different framing | Can't write compelling conclusion | | Effort remaining | Manageable, clear path | Moderate, toward a different goal | Large, success still uncertain | | Motivation | Engaged, believes in the work | Curious about pivot direction | Dreading the work |
Deliver a clear **Continue / Pivot / Kill** verdict with reasoning.
- For **Pivot**: suggest a concrete new framing — not just "consider pivoting."
- For **Kill**: suggest what to salvage (workshop paper, blog post, dataset release).
Always flag the sunk cost fallacy explicitly. Respect the work done, then recommend based on forward-looking expected value only.
**$ARGUMENTS**
Read more
description: > Strategic project triage — should you continue, pivot, or kill your current research project? Evaluates 5 signals (results, competition, impact, effort, motivation) and delivers a clear Continue/Pivot/Kill recommendation. For Pivot: suggests concrete new framing. For Kill: suggests what to salvage. allowed_tools: - Agent - Read - Write - Glob - Grep - Bash - WebSearch - WebFetch - mcp__academic-search__academic_search_all - mcp__academic-search__academic_search_semantic_scholar - mcp__academic-search__academic_search_arxiv user_invocable: true
/triage-project — Should You Continue This Project?
Read `agents/research-strategist.md` and execute **Mode 1: Project Triage**.
The user describes their current research project and its state. Evaluate using 5 signals:
| Signal | Continue | Pivot | Kill | |--------|----------|-------|------| | Results | Core hypothesis validated | Interesting side results | Core assumption disproven | | Competition | Still ahead or unique angle | Others approaching differently | Scooped on main contribution | | Impact | Conclusion-first test passes | Original framing weak, results support different framing | Can't write compelling conclusion | | Effort remaining | Manageable, clear path | Moderate, toward a different goal | Large, success still uncertain | | Motivation | Engaged, believes in the work | Curious about pivot direction | Dreading the work |
Deliver a clear **Continue / Pivot / Kill** verdict with reasoning.
- For **Pivot**: suggest a concrete new framing — not just "consider pivoting."
- For **Kill**: suggest what to salvage (workshop paper, blog post, dataset release).
Always flag the sunk cost fallacy explicitly. Respect the work done, then recommend based on forward-looking expected value only.
**$ARGUMENTS**
Ships withopen-academic-paper-machine
A Claude Code plugin that autonomously writes academic papers — from literature search to production-ready LaTeX/PDF. Scope note.
Get the whole plugin
Other commands on open-academic-paper-machine.
@tobiasblaskView CommandCommand
analyze-positioning
Analyze how the paper positions itself relative to the closest existing work. Identifies the 5-10 most similar papers, builds a differentiation matrix, and…
@tobiasblaskView CommandCommand
analyze-writing
Analyze academic writing quality of the current draft. Checks for passive voice overuse, weak openings, hedging balance, readability, sentence length…
@tobiasblaskView CommandCommand
audit-paper
Audit a paper's empirical claims against the linked code repository — catches MISMATCH, MISSING, and PARTIAL claims before submission
@tobiasblaskView CommandCommand
brainstorm
Creative research brainstorming — generate ideas researchers within a single field would miss. Cross-field connections, assumption challenges, alternative…
@tobiasblaskView CommandCommand
draft-section
Write one specific section of a paper as complete paragraphs. Use when you already have context and just need one section drafted. Follows writing-engine…
@tobiasblaskView Command