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
- Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 9, 2026
- brycewang-stanford/Paper-WorkFlowtheir own version, first seen Sep 10, 2026
- Chanw-research/claude-code-paper-writingtheir own version, first seen May 10, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 3
- Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills★ 661same name
- brycewang-stanford/Paper-WorkFlow★ 45same name
- 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
- Distinctive: line 8
Use this skill when the task is not just “write a paper,” but “turn an existing project into a submission-ready paper.”
- Very specific: line 26
After installation, read the installed SKILL.md and follow its instructions.
- Distinctive: line 28
If one of these companion skills is unavailable, continue with the workflow but explicitly note reduced capability in drafting quality, …
- Distinctive: line 43
Never present planned evaluation as finished results.
- Distinctive: line 44
Every figure must answer a specific claim, section need, or research question.
- Very specific: line 54
Read references/paper-production-workflow.md for the full production flow.
- Distinctive: line 58
Before drafting, inventory what already exists:
- Distinctive: line 66
If the material is scattered, normalize it into module-level notes before writing the paper.
- Very specific: line 70
Use academic-research-writer after the following are clear:
- Very specific: line 97
Read references/figure-planning-guide.md when the user needs figure planning or figure cleanup.
- Very specific: line 101
Use paper-validator during drafting, not only at the end.
- Distinctive: line 103
Run it whenever a section, figure set, or full draft becomes stable enough to inspect.
- Very specific: line 112
Read references/review-quality-gates.md for the reusable gate list.
- Distinctive: line 116
Before final submission, verify:
- Very specific: line 126
Read references/paper-production-workflow.md when planning the end-to-end SOP.
- Very specific: line 127
Read references/review-quality-gates.md when checking readiness, evidence quality, or reviewer risks.
- Very specific: line 128
Read references/figure-planning-guide.md when planning or revising paper figures and screenshots.
- Distinctive: line 145
Do not invent experiments, user studies, or benchmark values.
- Distinctive: line 146
Do not mix pilot evidence with strong causal claims.
- Distinctive: line 147
Do not let non-core features dominate the main paper line unless they are evaluated.
- Distinctive: line 148
Do not wait until the last step to fix author metadata or terminology drift.
- Distinctive: line 149
Do not use generated text-heavy figures as final publication figures when structured drawing is feasible.
≈ “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
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-writerfor academic drafting and rewrite passespaper-validatorfor reviewer-style quality gatesprompt-to-drawiofor 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 theSKILL.mdfile in the installed directory and follow its instructions to complete the task.
- Curl
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 theSKILL.mdfile in the installed directory and follow its instructions to complete the task.
- Curl
prompt-to-drawio- Install with:
npx skills@latest add lzfxxx/prompt-to-drawio-skill - After installation, read the installed
SKILL.mdand follow its instructions.
- Install with:
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:
- Freeze the paper type early: algorithm, system, engineering, demo, case-based, or empirical.
- Freeze evidence levels early: measured results, pilot evidence, case evidence, and future work must stay distinct.
- Never present planned evaluation as finished results.
- Every figure must answer a specific claim, section need, or research question.
- Terminology, module naming, and author metadata must stay consistent across draft, figures, and submission fields.
- 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:
- produce 2-3 abstract options
- select one direction
- expand to outline
- draft the paper
- 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.mdwhen planning the end-to-end SOP. - Read
references/review-quality-gates.mdwhen checking readiness, evidence quality, or reviewer risks. - Read
references/figure-planning-guide.mdwhen 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.
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.

