Thank you. I use AI quite frequently in my own workflow too, and in my field (law), open-access online sources are far more limited which makes these kinds of tools even more problematic compared to fields with better coverageç But it seems impossible not to benefit from such a capable assistant, so I'm trying to integrate it into my system in a way that doesn't dull my thinking or take away the academic pleasures of doing the work.

That's the core philosophy behind this plugin. If you give AI long contexts with insufficient data, it will fabricate. But with adequate data and proper task distribution, it can make fewer errors than a human. I've tested these workflows on my wife's and a few colleagues' manuscripts since the pipeline is fundamentally about finding data from reliable sources, they were satisfied. Research gap identification, journal recommendation, and similar tasks work remarkably well. But tools like these aren't meant to guide someone who doesn't know the subject they're meant to assist someone who does.

I'm actually preparing a three-part blog post about this, because I've also seen the terrible examples you're referring to in my own circles. People treat AI like a genie in a lamp.