outline-builder

Convert a taxonomy into a checkable, mappable outline (bullets only).

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "outline-builder" with this command: npx skills add willoscar/research-units-pipeline-skills/willoscar-research-units-pipeline-skills-outline-builder

Outline Builder

Convert a taxonomy into a checkable, mappable outline (bullets only).

Bullets should describe what the section must cover, not draft prose.

Role cards (prompt-level guidance)

Use these roles explicitly while drafting the outline. They guide decisions, not phrasing; avoid producing copyable prose sentences.

Outline Architect

  • Mission: design a paper-like ToC (few, thick chapters) that a reader would expect.

  • Do: budget H2/H3 counts; ensure each H3 is writeable (has a real comparison lens + evaluation angle).

  • Avoid: H3 explosion (many tiny buckets) and generic axis lists repeated everywhere.

Writer Proxy

  • Mission: simulate the downstream writer and ask: “Could I draft this H3 without guessing?”

  • Do: make each H3’s bullets encode tension + contrasts + evaluation anchors + failure modes.

  • Avoid: bullets that sound like narration (“This subsection…”) or slide transitions (“Next, we…”).

Scope Guardian

  • Mission: prevent silent scope drift.

  • Do: make in/out scope cues explicit in bullets (especially for boundaries like single-agent vs multi-agent, tool use vs RAG, etc.).

  • Avoid: leaving scope implicit and hoping the writer fixes it in prose.

When to use

  • You have a taxonomy and need an outline for mapping papers and building evidence.

  • You want each subsection to have concrete “coverage requirements” (axes, comparisons, evaluation).

When not to use

  • You already have an approved outline (don’t rewrite for style).

Input

  • outline/taxonomy.yml

  • Optional style references (paper-like section sizing):

  • ref/agent-surveys/STYLE_REPORT.md

  • ref/agent-surveys/text/

Output

  • outline/outline.yml

Workflow (heuristic)

Uses: outline/taxonomy.yml .

Optional style calibration (recommended for paper-like structure):

  • Read ref/agent-surveys/STYLE_REPORT.md to sanity-check top-level section counts and typical subsection sizing.

  • Skim 1–2 examples under ref/agent-surveys/text/ to imitate structure (not wording).

  • Target final ToC: ~6–8 H2 sections.

  • Note: this pipeline appends Discussion

  • Conclusion as global sections in C5 merge, so keep the outline itself <=6 H2 sections (often 5–6 including Intro+Related).
  • Translate taxonomy nodes into section headings that read like a survey structure.

  • For each H3 subsection, write bullets using the Stage A contract (verifiable, no prose paragraphs).

  • Minimum required bullets (first 4):

  • Intent: what the reader should learn (subsection-specific).

  • RQ: the question this subsection answers (1 line).

  • Evidence needs: what kinds of evidence must appear later (benchmarks/metrics/protocols/failure modes).

  • Expected cites: expected cite density / cite types (avoid placeholders like TBD/TODO).

  • Then add 2–6 subsection-specific bullets (comparisons/axes/eval anchors/failure modes).

  • For each subsection, ensure bullets are:

  • topic-specific (names of mechanisms, tasks, benchmarks, failure modes)

  • checkable (someone can verify whether the subsection covered it)

  • useful for mapping (papers can be assigned to each bullet/axis)

  • Prefer bullets that force synthesis later:

  • “Compare X vs Y along axes A/B/C”

  • “What evaluation setups are standard, and what they miss”

  • “Where methods fail (latency, tool errors, jailbreaks, reward hacking…)”

Quality checklist

  • outline/outline.yml exists and is bullets-only (no paragraphs).

  • Every subsection has the Stage A bullets: Intent: / RQ: / Evidence needs: / Expected cites: .

  • Every subsection has ≥3 additional non-generic bullets after the Stage A fields.

  • Bullets are not copy-pasted templates across subsections.

Common failure modes (and fixes)

  • Template bullets everywhere → replace with domain terms + evaluation axes specific to that subsection.

  • Bullets too vague (“Discuss limitations”) → name which limitations and how to test them.

  • Outline too flat/too deep → aim for a paper-like ToC (final ~6–8 H2) with fewer, thicker H3s.

  • Too many H3 subsections → merge adjacent H3s and write fewer, thicker subsections (paper-like default; budget depends on queries.md draft_profile: survey<=10, deep<=12).

  • Missing Stage A fields → add Intent/RQ/Evidence needs/Expected cites bullets so later mapping/evidence drafting can be audited.

Helper script (optional)

Quick Start

  • python .codex/skills/outline-builder/scripts/run.py --help

  • python .codex/skills/outline-builder/scripts/run.py --workspace <workspace_dir>

All Options

  • See --help (this helper is intentionally minimal)

Examples

  • Generate a baseline bullets-only outline, then refine bullets:

  • Run the helper once, then replace every generic bullet / TODO with topic-specific, checkable bullets.

Notes

  • The script generates a baseline bullets-only outline and never overwrites non-placeholder work.

  • Paper-like default: it inserts Introduction and Related Work as fixed H2 sections before taxonomy-driven chapters.

  • In pipeline.py --strict it will be blocked only if placeholder markers (TODO/TBD/FIXME/(placeholder)) remain.

Refinement marker (recommended; completion signal)

When you are satisfied with the outline (and after C2 approval if applicable), create:

  • outline/outline.refined.ok

This is an explicit "I reviewed/refined this" signal:

  • makes it harder for a scaffold-y outline to silently pass in strict runs

  • documents that bullets were rewritten into subsection-specific, checkable requirements

Troubleshooting

Common Issues

Issue: Outline still has TODO / scaffold bullets

Symptom:

  • Quality gate blocks outline_scaffold .

Causes:

  • Helper script generated a scaffold; bullets were not rewritten.

Solutions:

  • Replace every generic bullet with topic-specific, checkable bullets (axes, comparisons, evaluation setups, failure modes).

  • Keep bullets-only (no prose paragraphs).

Issue: Outline bullets are mostly generic templates

Symptom:

  • Quality gate blocks outline_template_bullets .

Causes:

  • Too many “Define problem…/Benchmarks…/Open problems…” template bullets.

Solutions:

  • Add concrete terms, datasets, evaluation metrics, and known failure modes per subsection.

Recovery Checklist

  • Every subsection has ≥3 non-template bullets.

  • No TODO /(placeholder) remains.

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Research

pdf-text-extractor

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Research

latex-compile-qa

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Research

draft-polisher

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Research

citation-verifier

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review