draft
Skill4 starsChanged 2 days agoMITView on GitHub
Draft academic and professional document sections from the user's own notes, data, documents, outline, and verified sources. Supports research chapters, articles, internship reports, and technical reports with evidence-first safeguards.
26 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- shoot16625/note-clitheir own version, first seen Nov 15, 2026
- Mharbulous/probanda-devtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- PeterPartridge/CooperativeAICodingtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- yuryalencar/ai-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- jigripokri/POHAtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- danicat/speedgraphertheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use onboard, status and 2 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
SentrySkillonboard
Onboard a service to sentry-options. Use when integrating a new service, creating schemas, or setting up the multi-repo sentry-options workflow.
Also in 3 projects that use this
AnthropicSkillstatus
Case status summary by audience — client-facing (plain language), internal (for the professor), or court-ready (formal caption format per local rules). Same facts, different framing and depth. Use when a student needs to update the client, brief the professor, or prepare a court status report.
Also in 3 projects that use this
VercelSkillsetup
Set up Vercel CLI and project configuration. Use when the user says "set up Vercel", "configure Vercel", "link to Vercel", or "vercel init".
Also in 4 projects that use this
- SentrySkill
review
Fixture review skill.
Also in 5 projects that use this
Other versions26 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 26
- anthropics/claude-for-legal★ 9.5ksame name
- jigripokri/POHA★ 121same name
- tance-mang/chinese-webnovel-skills★ 97same name
- danicat/speedgrapher★ 52same name
- richard-kim-79/archora-skills★ 49same name
- drafthq/draft★ 40same name
- alirezarezvani/gaios★ 37same name
- coolxeo/grok-bot-skills★ 7same name
- vercel-labs/workflow-campaign-demos★ 6same name
- iwe-org/marketing-workspace★ 5same name
16 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository4 other files it gives its agents.
- academic-writingSkill
- auditSkill
- editSkill
- outlineSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 24 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 12
Read ../shared/workflow-contract.md before substantive work.
- Distinctive: line 26
Create a terminology list and keep terminology and author point of view consistent.
- Distinctive: line 28
Verify citations, numbers, quotes, and data while drafting, not only at the end.
- Very specific: line 31
Run audit before describing a final package as ready for review or submission.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 24 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Draft
Read ../shared/workflow-contract.md before substantive work. Reuse a completed task profile from the project; treat ../shared/institution-profile.md as a template, not as verified rules.
Start from a finished outline. If none exists, use outline first. Follow the approved structure and do not silently change it. Route by genre: use references/article-manuscript.md for journal/conference manuscripts; use chapter references only for thesis, proposal, dissertation, or a guide-based chapter report. Never force Chapter I to V onto an article.
Evidence discipline
Classify factual material using shared labels E (evidence), C (citation), A (analysis), P (proposal), and U (unknown). Never present a proposal as an existing implementation. Use [NEED: ...] for missing evidence and [CHECK: ...] for unverified material.
Evidence may include direct observation, authorized records, source files, datasets, interview/observation notes, official documents, and verified literature. Student recollection may guide questions but needs confirmation for exact dates, figures, roles, or processes. Assumptions are not facts.
Workflow
- Confirm the genre, document stage, outline, and required output.
- Inventory guide, draft, notes, data, references, diagrams, and other available artifacts. State what has and has not been inspected.
- Create a terminology list and keep terminology and author point of view consistent.
- Draft one section or chapter at a time using its specific reference. Complete a section check before moving to the next.
- Verify citations, numbers, quotes, and data while drafting, not only at the end.
- Distinguish current state from proposed state and planned work from completed work.
- Report unresolved
[NEED: ...]and[CHECK: ...], traceability to the outline, and the next step. - Run
auditbefore describing a final package as ready for review or submission.
Method paths
Select the actual design: quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, R&D/prototyping, document study, conceptual argument, or another justified approach. Do not force hypotheses, experiments, sampling, or survey assumptions onto work that does not use them. Dataset statistics must be calculated from supplied data. Never quote, code, count, or report results that do not exist in the source material.
Integrity
Never invent data, respondents, sources, numbers, tests, results, implementation/deployment status, or approvals. Refuse ghostwriting intended to be submitted as the student's independent work and requests to disguise AI output as the user's own work. Never forge signatures, stamps, assessments, letters, attendance, or consultation records.
References
references/chapter1-introduction.mdthroughreferences/chapter5-conclusions.md: chapter-based research/report drafting.references/export.md: Markdown, DOCX, PDF, and citation export.references/article-manuscript.md: journal and conference manuscripts.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.