agentleFS
sidiangongyuansidiangongyuan/codex-skills-library/skills/paper-framework-figure-studio-pro/SKILL.md

paper-framework-figure-studio-pro

Skill11 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when planning a source-grounded method overview, architecture, pipeline, system/data-flow, mechanism, or agent-workflow figure for a CS or deep-learning paper. Produces an editable figure brief before image generation or manual redrawing; not for plots, tables, or general prose.

2 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

16 rules. About 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈11

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 5

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Treat image generation as opt-in.

    line 20
  2. Distinctive:

    Keep the workflow human-in-the-loop.

    line 22
  3. Distinctive:

    Stop after S5. The human chooses the final candidate, performs manual redrawing/editing, and decides final caption and paper placement.

    line 25
  4. Distinctive:

    Before designing the figure, identify the available evidence:

    line 32
  5. Distinctive:

    If inputs are incomplete, state the assumptions and ask only for missing facts that materially affect the diagram contract.

    line 44
  6. Very specific:

    Use references/workflow.md when a task needs the full staged process.

    line 50
  7. Distinctive:

    S2 Sketch exploration: only if explicitly requested, generate or describe first-round candidate directions.

    line 58
  8. Distinctive:

    S5 Candidate image: only if explicitly requested, generate final raster candidates.

    line 64
  9. Distinctive:

    Every visible entity, label, symbol, connector, and visual metaphor must be:

    line 72
  10. Distinctive:

    Use these checks before proposing prompts or candidates:

    line 78
  11. Distinctive:

    Do arrows have evidence for both source and target semantics?

    line 80
  12. Distinctive:

    If the contract is not supportable, stop at the risk register and ask for the missing paper detail or user decision.

    line 89
  13. Very specific:

    Use templates/figure-brief-template.md when the user asks for a structured brief or when a worker needs a handoff.

    line 107
  14. Very specific:

    Read references/source-map.md before discussing provenance, upstream licensing, or vault updates.

    line 112
  15. Very specific:

    Read references/workflow.md before running a full S0-S5 planning session.

    line 114
  16. Very specific:

    Use templates/figure-brief-template.md for reusable handoff briefs.

    line 115

≈ “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 Framework Figure Studio Pro

This is a lightweight local adapter inspired by c-narcissus/paper-framework-figure-studio-pro. It keeps the useful paper-grounded S0-S5 co-design flow while avoiding the upstream package's heavy asset vendoring, mandatory checkpoint zip behavior, and fixed personal response rules.

Default Boundaries

  • Work in conversation by default. Do not create project files, reports, checkpoints, generated images, or restore bundles unless the user explicitly asks for them.
  • Treat image generation as opt-in. S2 and S5 are planning handoff stages unless the user explicitly asks to generate images.
  • Keep the workflow human-in-the-loop. Execute at most one public stage per response unless the user explicitly requests a compact text-only bundle such as "do S0/S1 together."
  • Stop after S5. The human chooses the final candidate, performs manual redrawing/editing, and decides final caption and paper placement.
  • Route final plot/table polish, Matplotlib/LaTeX edits, captions, and rendered validation to $paper-visual-craft.

Input Discipline

Before designing the figure, identify the available evidence:

  • Paper source: PDF, LaTeX, abstract/method text, notes, or user summary.
  • Target role: method overview, architecture, pipeline, data flow, mechanism, or agent workflow.
  • Venue/style constraints: CVPR/ICCV/ECCV/NeurIPS/ICLR/ICML/CoRL, double column, grayscale safety, line-art preference, space budget.
  • Existing visuals: reference figures, current draft figure, or explicit instruction not to inspect an existing paper diagram.
  • User constraints: must-show modules, forbidden claims, terminology, symbols, and whether image generation is allowed.

If inputs are incomplete, state the assumptions and ask only for missing facts that materially affect the diagram contract. Do not invent paper modules, symbols, arrows, metrics, or evidence.

Local S0-S5 Workflow

Use references/workflow.md when a task needs the full staged process.

  • S0 Paper foundation: inventory sources, extract core modules, terms, equations/symbols, data/control/model flow, evidence anchors, and ambiguity risks.
  • S1 Figure strategy: define the reader question, figure type, story path, semantic graph, visible text budget, style family, and source-grounded prompt contract.
  • S2 Sketch exploration: only if explicitly requested, generate or describe first-round candidate directions. Default to text-only candidate briefs.
  • S3 Direction select: compare candidates against the source contract and user preference; record what to keep, avoid, simplify, or repair.
  • S4 Formal candidate brief: prepare the final candidate matrix or image prompts with strict source-fidelity, symbol, connector, and density rules.
  • S5 Candidate image: only if explicitly requested, generate final raster candidates. Otherwise hand off prompt packages or a manual-redraw brief.

For ordinary requests, start with S0/S1 and return a concise figure brief rather than a full staged dossier.

Source-Faithful Figure Contract

Every visible entity, label, symbol, connector, and visual metaphor must be:

  • directly supported by the paper/user material, or
  • explicitly marked as an inference with the reasoning chain, or
  • marked unsupported and excluded from the figure.

Use these checks before proposing prompts or candidates:

  • Do arrows have evidence for both source and target semantics?
  • Are variables, metrics, weights, losses, or thresholds shown as edge/port/tag information instead of peer modules when appropriate?
  • Does one symbol/color/line style mean exactly one thing?
  • Is the diagram explaining the paper's actual contribution rather than a generic architecture pattern?
  • Can dense details move to caption, legend, or prose without weakening the first-glance story?

If the contract is not supportable, stop at the risk register and ask for the missing paper detail or user decision.

Default Output

Unless the user requested files or images, answer in conversation with:

  • figure role
  • reader question
  • source-backed core modules
  • semantic flow
  • visible text contract
  • style / surface recommendation
  • must-include / must-exclude
  • risks or unsupported parts
  • candidate directions
  • next action

Use templates/figure-brief-template.md when the user asks for a structured brief or when a worker needs a handoff.

Reference Routing

  • Read references/source-map.md before discussing provenance, upstream licensing, or vault updates.
  • Read references/workflow.md before running a full S0-S5 planning session.
  • Use templates/figure-brief-template.md for reusable handoff briefs.

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.