Agent skill
table-schema
Define evidence-first table schemas for a survey: what each table must answer, row unit, columns, and which evidence-pack fields are required to fill it. **Trigger**: table schema, schema-first tables, table design, 表格 schema, 先 schema 后填充. **Use when**: you want survey tables that are verifiable and fillable before LaTeX (typically Stage C4, after evidence packs exist). **Skip if**: `outline/table_schema.md` already exists and is refined (covers both index tables and Appendix tables; no placeholders; evidence mapping is explicit). **Network**: none. **Guardrail**: no invented facts; schema must be checkable and map each column to an evidence source.
Install this agent skill to your Project
npx add-skill https://github.com/WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills/tree/main/.codex/skills/table-schema
SKILL.md
Table Schema (two layers: index vs Appendix)
Tables are not decorations; they are compression.
A common failure mode in this pipeline: the first table that gets generated looks like an internal index. So we separate tables into two layers:
outline/tables_index.md(internal)
- purpose: coverage/debugging + fast evidence scan
- allowed to be more exhaustive
- should NOT be inserted into the paper
outline/tables_appendix.md(reader-facing)
- purpose: publishable survey tables (clean layout + high information density)
- can be inserted into the final PDF as Appendix
This skill designs both layers before filling.
Default mode: semantic (LLM-first)
Treat this as a design task, not running a script.
If a column cannot be filled from existing evidence packs without guessing, the schema is wrong.
Roles (use explicitly)
Table Designer (reader lens)
Mission: choose tables that answer reader questions, not pipeline questions.
Do:
- make each table answer one question
- keep tables small enough to fill (two good tables beat one impossible mega-table)
Avoid:
- internal/log-style tables inside the paper
- column labels that only make sense inside this repo
Evidence Steward (fillability)
Mission: refuse schemas that require invented facts.
Do:
- map every column to concrete upstream fields
- reject columns that would force long paragraph cells
Avoid:
- TODO columns
- placeholders ("TBD", "...", "(placeholder)")
Workflow (explicit inputs)
- Use
GOAL.mdto keep the reader question and scope stable. - Use
outline/outline.ymlto align table row units with the paper structure. - Use
outline/subsection_briefs.jsonlto ground table dimensions/axes in the approved structure. - Use
outline/evidence_drafts.jsonlto ensure every planned column is fillable without guessing.
Inputs
outline/outline.ymloutline/subsection_briefs.jsonloutline/evidence_drafts.jsonl- Optional:
GOAL.md
Output
outline/table_schema.md
Non-negotiables (schema contract)
- Minimum definitions:
- Index tables: >=2
- Appendix tables: >=2
- Every table definition must include:
- the question it answers
- the row unit (H3 / benchmark / work / failure mode)
- columns (with cell style constraints)
- evidence mapping (which upstream fields fill which columns)
- Cell style: short phrases; avoid paragraph cells.
- Paper voice: Appendix table captions/columns must be publishable (no pipeline jargon).
Recommended defaults (arxiv-survey family)
Index tables (for table-filler -> outline/tables_index.md)
I1) Subsection map (axes + representative works)
- Row unit: H3
- Columns: subsection; axes; representative works
- Evidence sources:
subsection_briefs.axes+ citations fromevidence_drafts
I2) Concrete anchors (benchmarks / numbers / caveats)
- Row unit: H3
- Columns: subsection; anchor facts; representative works
- Evidence sources:
anchor_sheet.anchors
Appendix tables (for appendix-table-writer -> outline/tables_appendix.md)
A1) Method/architecture map (representative works)
- Row unit: work/system line
- Columns: work; core idea; loop + interface assumptions; key refs
- Evidence sources:
evidence_drafts(comparisons + definitions) +anchor_sheet
A2) Evaluation protocol / benchmark map
- Row unit: benchmark or evaluation setting (fallback: protocol dimension)
- Columns: benchmark/setting; task+metric; key protocol constraints; key refs
- Evidence sources:
anchor_sheet+evidence_drafts.evaluation_protocol
Positive / negative examples
Good (publishable question + fillable columns):
- Question: "Which benchmarks anchor evaluation in this area, and what task/metric/constraints do they imply?"
- Columns: Benchmark; Task+metric; Protocol constraints; Key refs
- Evidence mapping:
evidence_drafts.evaluation_protocol+anchor_sheet
Bad (internal/pipeline voice):
- Question: "What is evidence readiness + verification needs?"
- Columns: evidence levels, missing fields, TODO checklist
If you want internal diagnostics, put them in an audit report, not in reader-facing tables.
Script (optional bootstrap)
Quick Start
python .codex/skills/table-schema/scripts/run.py --helppython .codex/skills/table-schema/scripts/run.py --workspace workspaces/<ws>
All Options
--workspace <workspace_dir>(required)--unit-id <id>(optional; used only for runner bookkeeping)--inputs <outline;briefs;packs;goal>(optional; override inputs)--outputs <relpath>(optional; defaults tooutline/table_schema.md)--checkpoint <C#>(optional; ignored by the bootstrapper)
Examples
-
Bootstrap a two-layer schema (index + Appendix):
python .codex/skills/table-schema/scripts/run.py --workspace workspaces/<ws> -
Write to a custom schema path (rare):
python .codex/skills/table-schema/scripts/run.py --workspace workspaces/<ws> --outputs outline/table_schema.md
Notes:
- Use the script as a starting point, then refine the schema as a paper artifact.
- If a column cannot be filled from evidence packs without guessing, the schema is wrong.
Recommended Agent Skills
Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.
thesis-compile-review
对中文毕业论文进行编译、warning 分级、模板模式检查、数据与引用复查,并把问题回写成可继续迭代的 review checklist。 **Trigger**: 毕业论文编译检查, thesis compile review, warning 分级, 终稿复查, main.pdf 检查. **Use when**: 论文已经回写到 TeX 交付层,需要确认是否真正达到“可提交”的质量,而不是只做到能编译。 **Skip if**: 还处于中间层重构阶段,`chapters/*.tex` 尚未形成稳定交付稿。 **Network**: none. **Guardrail**: 不在这里重构章节主线;如果发现结构问题,明确回退到上游修复。
front-matter-writer
Write the survey's front matter files (Abstract, Introduction, Related Work, Discussion, Conclusion) in paper voice, with high citation density and a single evidence-policy paragraph. **Trigger**: front matter writer, introduction writer, related work writer, abstract writer, discussion writer, conclusion writer, 引言, 相关工作, 摘要, 讨论, 结论. **Use when**: you are in C5 (prose allowed) and need the paper-like shell to stop the draft reading like stitched subsections. **Skip if**: `Approve C2` is missing in `DECISIONS.md`, or `citations/ref.bib` is missing. **Network**: none. **Guardrail**: no invented facts/citations; no pipeline jargon in final prose; no repeated evidence disclaimers; only use keys present in `citations/ref.bib`.
thesis-question-list
维护中文毕业论文的 `codex_md/question_list.md`:把本轮问题、边界、优先级、协作方案和验收口径结构化,作为整条 thesis pipeline 的控制面。 **Trigger**: 毕业论文问题清单, thesis question list, 论文修改清单, 本轮目标, 结构问题梳理, review问题整理. **Use when**: 你已经有一批材料或上一轮 review 结果,需要明确这一轮到底修什么、不修什么,并给后续重构与编译复查提供统一入口。 **Skip if**: 当前只是在做一次性局部措辞修改,且没有形成新一轮结构/证据/编译问题。 **Network**: none. **Guardrail**: 不在这里写正文;不把问题单写成长篇散文;每条问题必须可执行、可验收。
novelty-matrix
Create a novelty/prior-work matrix comparing the submission’s contributions against related work (overlaps vs deltas). **Trigger**: novelty matrix, prior-work matrix, overlap/delta, 相关工作对比, 新颖性矩阵. **Use when**: peer review 中评估 novelty/positioning,需要把贡献与相关工作逐项对齐并写出差异点证据。 **Skip if**: 缺少 claims(先跑 `claims-extractor`)或你不打算做新颖性定位分析。 **Network**: none (retrieval of additional related work is out-of-scope unless provided). **Guardrail**: 明确 overlap 与 delta;尽量给出可追溯证据来源(来自稿件/引用/作者陈述)。
protocol-writer
Write a systematic review protocol into `output/PROTOCOL.md` (databases, queries, inclusion/exclusion, time window, extraction fields). **Trigger**: protocol, PRISMA, systematic review, inclusion/exclusion, 检索式, 纳入排除. **Use when**: systematic review pipeline 的起点(C1),需要先锁定 protocol 再开始 screening/extraction。 **Skip if**: 不是做 systematic review(或 protocol 已经锁定且不允许修改)。 **Network**: none. **Guardrail**: protocol 必须包含可执行的检索与筛选规则;需要 HUMAN 签字后才能进入 screening。
rubric-writer
Write a rubric-based peer review report (`output/REVIEW.md`) using extracted claims and evidence gaps (novelty/soundness/clarity/impact). **Trigger**: rubric review, referee report, peer review write-up, 审稿报告, REVIEW.md. **Use when**: peer-review pipeline 的最后阶段(C3),已有 `output/CLAIMS.md` + `output/MISSING_EVIDENCE.md`(以及可选 novelty matrix)。 **Skip if**: 上游产物未就绪(claims/evidence gaps 缺失)或你不打算输出完整审稿报告。 **Network**: none. **Guardrail**: 给可执行建议(actionable feedback),并覆盖 novelty/soundness/clarity/impact;避免泛泛而谈。
Didn't find tool you were looking for?