research-format
Skill2 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Claim-sliced report composer for research Phase 6. Writes canonical output/report.md from section briefs and claim slices; publishing renders optional formats later.
In this repository3 other files it gives its agents.
- research-collectSkill
- researchSkill
- research-synthesizeSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
Distinctive · estimate
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 17
When invoked by research, use only:
- Very specific: line 44
Do not write output/report.qmd, output/report.html, or output/report.pdf.
- Distinctive: line 49
All citations use one global format:
- Distinctive: line 79
Use graph hints only for central entities, cross-links, and relationship language inside the existing planned section.
- Distinctive: line 80
Do not let graph hints create, remove, or reorder sections.
- Distinctive: line 107
Every factual sentence must be grounded in claims from the active section slice.
- Distinctive: line 109
Do not invent claims, URLs, source titles, statistics, or graph relationships.
- Distinctive: line 131
add uncited factual content,
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Research Format Skill
Composes the canonical Markdown report for claim_pipeline_v1.
This skill is a report composer, not a researcher and not a publisher. It writes
output/report.md from compact structured research state. HTML, PDF, and QMD
outputs are generated later by the publishing phase from output/report.md.
Required Inputs
When invoked by research, use only:
| Input | Path | Purpose |
| Output preferences | manifest.json | depth, audience, tone, render targets |
| Section briefs | synthesis/section_briefs/<section_id>.json | section title, summary, required claim IDs, boundaries |
| Claim slices | synthesis/claim_slices/<section_id>.json | compact required claims, optional claim briefs, and source records available to a section |
| Graph hints | synthesis/section_graph_hints.json | advisory per-section relationships only |
The formatter must not read these files in the main path:
synthesis/raw_research.md(deprecated; not a formatter input)synthesis/claim_bank.jsoncollect/inventory.json- full Graphify outputs
collect/graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md
Missing claim slices are fatal. Do not fall back to claim_bank.json.
Required Outputs
output/assembly_plan.jsonoutput/sections/<section_id>.mdoutput/sections/<section_id>.meta.jsonoutput/report.mdoutput/formatter_audit.json
Do not write output/report.qmd, output/report.html, or output/report.pdf.
Those belong to publishing.
Citation Contract
All citations use one global format:
[Source Title](url)Numeric citations such as [1](url) or [1] are disallowed. Mixed citation
styles fail the formatter audit.
Composition Flow
Build the assembly plan:
python3 ~/.claude/skills/research-format/scripts/report_composer.py \ build-plan --run-dir "$run_dir"- For each assembly-plan section, read only:
section_brief_path,claim_slice_path,- graph hints matching the same
section_id, - format preferences.
- Compose
output/sections/<section_id>.md.- Start with
## <Section Title>. - Open with a short summary.
- Include every
must_include_claim_idfromrequired_claims. - Include optional claims only when useful for the selected depth.
- Preserve missing-evidence notes and contradictions.
- Use graph hints only for central entities, cross-links, and relationship language inside the existing planned section.
- Do not let graph hints create, remove, or reorder sections.
- Start with
- Emit
output/sections/<section_id>.meta.json.claim_ids_usedmust include all required claims used in prose, tables, or diagrams.source_ids_usedmust be a subset of the sectionsource_records.cross_linksmust reference existing planned section IDs only.warningsshould record skipped optional claims, weak evidence, or unresolved overlap.
Assemble the canonical report:
python3 ~/.claude/skills/research-format/scripts/report_composer.py \ assemble --run-dir "$run_dir"Run the audit:
python3 ~/.claude/skills/research-format/scripts/report_composer.py \ audit --run-dir "$run_dir"Formatting is not complete until
formatter_audit.jsonhas no errors.
Writing Rules
- The report must be useful as Markdown without any rendered format.
- Every factual sentence must be grounded in claims from the active section slice.
- The formatter may omit low-salience optional claims unless depth is comprehensive or audit-oriented.
- Do not invent claims, URLs, source titles, statistics, or graph relationships.
- Tables are preferred for comparisons of three or more comparable items.
- Mermaid diagrams are allowed only when they clarify a process or relationship.
- Paragraphs longer than five sentences should be split into bullets, tables, or subheadings.
Assembler Rules
The assembler may:
- concatenate sections in approved order,
- normalize heading levels,
- build the table of contents,
- generate a source list from actually used source IDs,
- remove duplicate intros,
- fix light transitions,
- flag or lightly merge obvious overlaps.
The assembler may not:
- reread evidence,
- reinterpret claims,
- rewrite whole sections,
- add uncited factual content,
- silently drop unique claims.
Legacy Raw-Research Mode
density_scan.py, coverage_audit.py, raw_research.md, and
claim_index.json are legacy compatibility mechanisms. They are not used for
new claim_pipeline_v1 runs.
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.

