agentleFS
lzfxxxlzfxxx/paper-workflow/SKILL.md

paper-workflow

Skill0 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Turn existing project assets into a submission-ready academic paper. Use when the task involves CFP alignment, evidence scoping, abstract selection, outline expansion, figure planning, reviewer-style quality gates, submission packaging, or post-submission archiving. Coordinates academic-research-writer, paper-validator, and prompt-to-drawio.

3 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions3 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 3

    1. Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills★ 661same name
    2. brycewang-stanford/Paper-WorkFlow★ 45same name
    3. Chanw-research/claude-code-paper-writing★ 42same name

    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.

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

22 rules. About 0 are common, 13 are distinctive, and 9 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈13

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 9

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use this skill when the task is not just “write a paper,” but “turn an existing project into a submission-ready paper.”

    line 8
  2. Very specific:

    After installation, read the installed SKILL.md and follow its instructions.

    line 26
  3. Distinctive:

    If one of these companion skills is unavailable, continue with the workflow but explicitly note reduced capability in drafting quality, …

    line 28
  4. Distinctive:

    Never present planned evaluation as finished results.

    line 43
  5. Distinctive:

    Every figure must answer a specific claim, section need, or research question.

    line 44
  6. Very specific:

    Read references/paper-production-workflow.md for the full production flow.

    line 54
  7. Distinctive:

    Before drafting, inventory what already exists:

    line 58
  8. Distinctive:

    If the material is scattered, normalize it into module-level notes before writing the paper.

    line 66
  9. Very specific:

    Use academic-research-writer after the following are clear:

    line 70
  10. Very specific:

    Read references/figure-planning-guide.md when the user needs figure planning or figure cleanup.

    line 97
  11. Very specific:

    Use paper-validator during drafting, not only at the end.

    line 101
  12. Distinctive:

    Run it whenever a section, figure set, or full draft becomes stable enough to inspect.

    line 103
  13. Very specific:

    Read references/review-quality-gates.md for the reusable gate list.

    line 112
  14. Distinctive:

    Before final submission, verify:

    line 116
  15. Very specific:

    Read references/paper-production-workflow.md when planning the end-to-end SOP.

    line 126
  16. Very specific:

    Read references/review-quality-gates.md when checking readiness, evidence quality, or reviewer risks.

    line 127
  17. Very specific:

    Read references/figure-planning-guide.md when planning or revising paper figures and screenshots.

    line 128
  18. Distinctive:

    Do not invent experiments, user studies, or benchmark values.

    line 145
  19. Distinctive:

    Do not mix pilot evidence with strong causal claims.

    line 146
  20. Distinctive:

    Do not let non-core features dominate the main paper line unless they are evaluated.

    line 147
  21. Distinctive:

    Do not wait until the last step to fix author metadata or terminology drift.

    line 148
  22. Distinctive:

    Do not use generated text-heavy figures as final publication figures when structured drawing is feasible.

    line 149

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Paper Workflow

Use this skill when the task is not just “write a paper,” but “turn an existing project into a submission-ready paper.”

This is an orchestration skill. It coordinates three specialized skills:

  • academic-research-writer for academic drafting and rewrite passes
  • paper-validator for reviewer-style quality gates
  • prompt-to-drawio for architecture, workflow, sequence, and state diagrams

Companion Skills Setup

Install these companion skills before relying on the full workflow:

  • academic-research-writer
    • Curl https://lobehub.com/skills/neversight-skills_feed-academic-research-writer/skill.md, then follow the instructions to set up LobeHub Skills Marketplace and install the skill. Once installed, read the SKILL.md file in the installed directory and follow its instructions to complete the task.
  • paper-validator
    • Curl https://lobehub.com/skills/minhuw-claude-writer-paper-validator/skill.md, then follow the instructions to set up LobeHub Skills Marketplace and install the skill. Once installed, read the SKILL.md file in the installed directory and follow its instructions to complete the task.
  • prompt-to-drawio
    • Install with: npx skills@latest add lzfxxx/prompt-to-drawio-skill
    • After installation, read the installed SKILL.md and follow its instructions.

If one of these companion skills is unavailable, continue with the workflow but explicitly note reduced capability in drafting quality, reviewer simulation, or structured figure production.

When to Use This Skill

  • Converting an existing system, product, codebase, report, or prototype into a paper
  • Working from fragmented assets: code, docs, slides, screenshots, pilot notes, or prior abstracts
  • Preparing a conference or journal submission with page, figure, and metadata constraints
  • Running multi-round paper production: abstract selection, outline, draft, review, compression, submission package

Core Rules

Apply these rules from the start, not only during final review:

  1. Freeze the paper type early: algorithm, system, engineering, demo, case-based, or empirical.
  2. Freeze evidence levels early: measured results, pilot evidence, case evidence, and future work must stay distinct.
  3. Never present planned evaluation as finished results.
  4. Every figure must answer a specific claim, section need, or research question.
  5. Terminology, module naming, and author metadata must stay consistent across draft, figures, and submission fields.
  6. UI screenshots are evidence artifacts, not marketing assets.

Workflow

1. Align Constraints

Confirm conference or journal constraints first: CFP, page limit, template, submission type, deadlines, and metadata requirements.

Read references/paper-production-workflow.md for the full production flow.

2. Inventory Assets

Before drafting, inventory what already exists:

  • code and implementation paths
  • technical docs and module notes
  • experiments, logs, pilot data, interview notes
  • screenshots and figures
  • prior abstracts, outlines, or leadership summaries

If the material is scattered, normalize it into module-level notes before writing the paper.

3. Draft the Narrative

Use academic-research-writer after the following are clear:

  • main contribution boundary
  • target paper type
  • evidence level per claim
  • core modules versus extensions

Typical sequence:

  1. produce 2-3 abstract options
  2. select one direction
  3. expand to outline
  4. draft the paper
  5. maintain a concise internal-language review version if helpful

4. Produce Figures

Define figure roles before drawing them.

Use prompt-to-drawio for:

  • system architecture diagrams
  • end-to-end workflow diagrams
  • sequence diagrams
  • state transition diagrams
  • artifact or contract flow diagrams

Read references/figure-planning-guide.md when the user needs figure planning or figure cleanup.

5. Run Quality Gates

Use paper-validator during drafting, not only at the end.

Run it whenever a section, figure set, or full draft becomes stable enough to inspect. Focus on:

  • claim/evidence mismatch
  • placeholders, empty tables, and speculative results
  • figure-text inconsistency
  • novelty overstatement
  • reviewer confusion points
  • metadata and submission blockers

Read references/review-quality-gates.md for the reusable gate list.

6. Package Submission

Before final submission, verify:

  • authors, affiliations, emails, corresponding author
  • abstract and keywords
  • declarations, ethics, data/code availability
  • figure captions, references, and template compliance
  • submission status and archive notes

Reference Loading Guide

  • Read references/paper-production-workflow.md when planning the end-to-end SOP.
  • Read references/review-quality-gates.md when checking readiness, evidence quality, or reviewer risks.
  • Read references/figure-planning-guide.md when planning or revising paper figures and screenshots.

Expected Outputs

Depending on the task, this skill should help produce some of the following:

  • module or capability notes
  • abstract options
  • paper outline
  • main manuscript draft
  • review checklist or reviewer-pass notes
  • figure plan and figure assets
  • submission checklist
  • submission-status update

Important Constraints

  • Do not invent experiments, user studies, or benchmark values.
  • Do not mix pilot evidence with strong causal claims.
  • Do not let non-core features dominate the main paper line unless they are evaluated.
  • Do not wait until the last step to fix author metadata or terminology drift.
  • Do not use generated text-heavy figures as final publication figures when structured drawing is feasible.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.