Find lawful full-text versions of research papers

Why use this

1. A citation search may lead to an abstract, an earlier manuscript or a broken repository link rather than the paper needed for review. Researchers also need to know whether a usable copy differs from the version cited in their source.

2. This job could produce a transparent access map with version labels and unresolved items. That would help the researcher decide what can be read now, what requires an authorized library route and which citations need correction before further analysis.

Why an agent / simpler alternative

Useful judgment

Reconcile citation variants and distinguish publisher records, manuscripts and repository full text.

Simpler alternative

Use a DOI resolver or institutional link service for a short clean reference list.

Unsuitable when

The task requires bypassing a paywall, access control or redistribution restriction.

Proposed inputs

1. Name

   Citation list

   Owner

   Researcher

   Minimum scope

   Titles, authors, year, DOI and journal where available

   Quality check

   Flag incomplete references and possible duplicate editions.

2. Name

   Access preferences

   Owner

   Researcher

   Minimum scope

   Authorized repository or library routes and acceptable versions

   Quality check

   Specify whether preprints or accepted manuscripts meet the research need.

Access and setup — proposed or unknown

Proposed minimum

1. Read public scholarly metadata and authorized full-text locations; maintain a citation-access ledger.

Compatibility unknowns

1. Unknown: current repository availability, institutional entitlements and browser access.

External actions requiring approval

1. Signing in, purchasing access or redistributing downloaded papers.

Expected deliverable and review checks

Proposed artifact

Citation table with verified identity, full-text location, version, access status and unresolved discrepancies.

Critical checks

1. An abstract landing page is not labelled full text.

2. The linked document matches the intended authors, title and version.

Missing output evidence

This overlay adds no new output inspection or execution validation. Preserve the canonical implementation evidence and its outcome limits.

Failure signals and proposed responses

1. Signal

   A repository file has a similar title but different authors.

   Why it matters

   The researcher may analyse the wrong paper.

   Proposed response

   Compare DOI and bibliographic details and reject the mismatch.

2. Signal

   A preprint omits revisions present in the cited journal version.

   Why it matters

   Important methods or conclusions may differ.

   Proposed response

   Label the version and explain that final-version access remains unresolved.

Effort and cost — unknown

Setup work

1. Normalize citations and agree acceptable manuscript versions.

Ongoing review

1. Resolve ambiguous references and revisit broken access links when needed.

Unknowns

1. Unknown: institutional access, publisher charges and version-comparison effort.

First check — proposed, unexecuted

Status

proposed_unexecuted

Synthetic fixture

A fictional citation set includes a DOI-linked article, an abstract-only page and an accepted manuscript with a clear version label.

Acceptance checks

1. The abstract-only entry remains unavailable as full text.

2. The manuscript is offered with its version caveat, not as an identical final copy.

Stop conditions

1. Access restrictions must be bypassed or a paid purchase is required.

Limits

1. An accessible copy is not automatically the authoritative version or permission to redistribute its contents.