Appendix Table Writer (publishable survey tables)
Why this exists
The pipeline can produce index tables that are useful for planning/debugging, but read like internal artifacts.
This skill writes publishable, reader-facing tables that can live in an Appendix:
-
cleaner layout
-
higher information density
-
survey-style organization (methods/benchmarks/risks), not intermediate state
Index tables remain in outline/tables_index.md and should not be copied verbatim into the paper.
Inputs
-
outline/table_schema.md (table intent + evidence mapping)
-
outline/tables_index.md (internal index; optional but recommended)
-
outline/subsection_briefs.jsonl
-
outline/evidence_drafts.jsonl
-
outline/anchor_sheet.jsonl
-
citations/ref.bib
-
Optional: GOAL.md
Output
- outline/tables_appendix.md
Roles (use explicitly)
Survey Table Curator (reader lens)
Mission: choose tables a reader actually wants in a survey Appendix.
Do:
-
prefer 2-3 tables that answer big questions (methods, evaluation, risks)
-
make rows comparable (same row unit across the table)
-
make the table legible without reading the whole paper
Avoid:
-
one-row-per-H3 index dumps
-
columns named like internal axes ("axes", "blocking_missing", "evidence readiness")
Production Editor (layout)
Mission: make the table look publishable in LaTeX.
Do:
-
keep columns <= 4
-
keep cells short (phrases, not sentences)
-
use <br> sparingly (0-1 per cell; never a list dump)
Avoid:
-
6-8 columns with tiny unreadable text
-
cells that look like notes (semicolon chains + slash lists + long parentheticals)
-
slash-separated axis markers (A/B/C) in captions/headers/cells (post-merge voice gate will flag them); use commas or 'and' instead
-
internal axis jargon that reads like an intermediate artifact once printed (e.g., calling table columns "tokens"); prefer "protocol details/metadata/assumptions"
Evidence Steward (verifiability)
Mission: prevent hallucinations.
Do:
-
every row must include citations in a dedicated column (e.g., "Key refs")
-
only restate what appears in evidence packs / anchor sheet
-
when evidence is thin, prefer fewer rows with stronger grounding
Avoid:
-
"representative works" with no supporting claim in packs/anchors
-
adding benchmark/method details not present upstream
Table contract (publishable, Appendix-ready)
outline/tables_appendix.md must:
-
contain >=2 Markdown tables
-
use a caption line before each table, e.g. Appendix Table A1. ...
-
contain no headings (# , ## , ### ) inside the file (the merger adds an Appendix heading)
-
contain no placeholders (TODO , TBD , FIXME , ... , unicode ellipsis)
-
contain citations in rows using [@BibKey] (keys must exist in citations/ref.bib )
-
avoid pipeline jargon and index-like column names
Workflow (explicit inputs)
-
Start from GOAL.md (scope) and outline/table_schema.md (what each table must answer).
-
Use outline/tables_index.md as a shortlist source, but do not paste it verbatim.
-
Fill rows/cells using outline/subsection_briefs.jsonl , outline/evidence_drafts.jsonl , and outline/anchor_sheet.jsonl (no guessing).
-
Validate every cited key against citations/ref.bib .
Recommended Appendix tables (default set)
If you are unsure what to build, start with these two:
-
Method/architecture map (representative works)
-
Row unit: work/system line (not H3 id)
-
Columns (example):
-
Work (short name)
-
Core idea (1 short phrase)
-
Loop + interface assumptions (1 short phrase; reader-facing)
-
Key refs (2-4 cite keys)
-
Evaluation protocol / benchmark map
-
Row unit: benchmark / evaluation setting (or a canonical protocol dimension if benchmarks are thin)
-
Columns (example):
-
Benchmark / setting
-
Task + metric (phrases, not definitions)
-
Key protocol constraints (budget/cost/latency/steps/tool access/threat model)
-
Key refs (2-4 cite keys)
Optional third (only if it stays clean): 3) Risk / threat-surface map
-
Row unit: threat/failure mode category
-
Columns: surface; why it matters; mitigation pattern; key refs
Positive / negative examples (style)
Bad (index table / internal notes):
-
Column: "Axes"
-
Cell: planning / memory / tools / eval / safety (slash dump)
-
Rows: every H3 id with 5+ <br> lines
Good (survey table):
-
Column labels are reader-facing ("Core idea", "Task + metric", "Constraint")
-
Cells are short phrases (no narration)
-
A reader can scan and compare rows quickly
Also good (avoid intermediate-artifact tells):
-
Don't label columns as "token(s)". If you need the idea, rewrite as "protocol details/metadata/assumptions".
-
Avoid ASCII arrows like -> inside cells; prefer natural phrasing (e.g., "interleaves reasoning traces with tool actions").
When to stop / route upstream
If you cannot fill a row without guessing:
-
remove the row (prefer fewer, solid rows), and
-
route upstream: strengthen evidence-draft / anchor-sheet for that area.
Script (validator-only)
Quick Start
-
python .codex/skills/appendix-table-writer/scripts/run.py --help
-
python .codex/skills/appendix-table-writer/scripts/run.py --workspace workspaces/<ws>
All Options
-
--workspace <workspace_dir> (required)
-
--unit-id <id> (optional; used only for runner bookkeeping)
-
--inputs <a;b;c> (optional; ignored by the validator; kept for runner compatibility)
-
--outputs <relpath> (optional; defaults to outline/tables_appendix.md )
-
--checkpoint <C#> (optional; ignored by the validator)
Examples
Validate the default appendix tables file:
python .codex/skills/appendix-table-writer/scripts/run.py --workspace workspaces/e2e-agent-survey-latex-verify-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS
Validate a workspace that writes appendix tables to a non-standard path:
python .codex/skills/appendix-table-writer/scripts/run.py --workspace workspaces/<ws> --outputs outline/tables_appendix.md
Notes:
-
This script does not write table content. It only validates that outline/tables_appendix.md is Appendix-ready.
-
It always writes a short report to output/TABLES_APPENDIX_REPORT.md .