snapshot-writer

Snapshot Writer (1-page, bullet-first)

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 "snapshot-writer" with this command: npx skills add willoscar/research-units-pipeline-skills/willoscar-research-units-pipeline-skills-snapshot-writer

Snapshot Writer (1-page, bullet-first)

Goal: produce a compact, reader-facing snapshot that answers:

  • what is the topic boundary?

  • what are the key themes?

  • what should a reader read first?

This is intentionally not a full survey: prefer tight bullets + concrete pointers over narrative.

Role cards (use explicitly)

Snapshot Editor (scout)

Mission: deliver a one-page, high-signal snapshot that a reader can act on immediately.

Do:

  • Keep every bullet content-bearing: claim -> why it matters -> pointer(s).

  • Prefer contrasts and evaluation anchors over topic lists.

  • Treat paper pointers as the product (auditable, minimal).

Avoid:

  • Outline narration ("This snapshot/section...") and slide navigation ("Next, we...").

  • Generic survey boilerplate and disclaimer spam.

  • Turning the snapshot into a mini-survey with long paragraphs.

Pointer Curator (bibliography hygiene)

Mission: ensure every pointer is concrete and traceable to papers/core_set.csv .

Do:

  • Use a stable pointer format: P#### - Title (arXiv:... / doi:... / url:...) .

  • Mix canonical anchors + recent strong baselines + benchmark/protocol papers.

Avoid:

  • Dumping every paper; the snapshot is a reading path, not a catalog.

Role prompt: Snapshot Author (bullet-first; paper-like)

You are writing a one-page literature snapshot.

Your job is to be useful fast:

  • define the topic boundary
  • surface the key themes as claims (not headings)
  • give an actionable reading path (paper pointers)

Style:

  • bullets-first, compact, calm
  • no narration ("In this snapshot...") and no slide navigation ("Next, we...")

Constraints:

  • do not invent papers
  • pointers must come from papers/core_set.csv (or the same workspace candidate pool)
  • if evidence is abstract-only, state it once as a single bullet, then move on

Inputs

Required:

  • outline/outline.yml

  • papers/core_set.csv

Optional (if available):

  • queries.md (time window / exclusions context)

  • papers/papers_dedup.jsonl (if core_set is very small)

Outputs

  • output/SNAPSHOT.md

Writing contract (paper-like, not generator-like)

  • Keep it to about 1 page (roughly <= 700-900 words).

  • Bullets-first: use short paragraphs only when unavoidable (<= 3 lines each).

  • No outline narration: avoid This section/subsection ... , In this snapshot ... , Next, we ... .

  • Don’t spam disclaimers: if evidence is abstract-only, say it once in a short “Evidence policy” line.

  • Every claim bullet should attach at least 1 concrete pointer (paper_id + title; include arxiv_id/doi/url when present).

Recommended structure (stable, minimal headings)

  • Title + scope (2-3 bullets)

  • Evidence policy (1 bullet)

  • Taxonomy (4-6 bullets; groupings only)

  • Key themes (6-10 bullets; each bullet = 1 claim + 1-2 pointers)

  • What to read first (6-12 bullets; canonical + recent; each bullet has pointers)

  • Open problems / risks (4-8 bullets)

Workflow

Read outline/outline.yml and extract:

  • the intended chapter structure (H2)

  • the 6-10 most “write-worthy” bullets per chapter

Read papers/core_set.csv and build a small “pointer palette”

  • Prefer: canonical anchors + recent strong baselines + evaluation/benchmark papers.

  • Avoid: dumping every paper; pick “must-read” sets.

  • If papers/core_set.csv is very small, also scan papers/papers_dedup.jsonl and cherry-pick a few missing anchors (keep pointers auditable).

Write output/SNAPSHOT.md

  • Start each section with a content claim (why it matters), not a navigation sentence.

  • Make at least 2 cross-paper contrasts (A vs B) to avoid a flat list.

  • Use consistent pointer formatting, e.g.:

  • P0012 - <Title> (arXiv:xxxx.xxxxx) or P0012 - <Title> (doi:...)

Definition of Done

  • output/SNAPSHOT.md exists and reads like a human-written snapshot (no template narration).

  • Includes >= 15 distinct paper pointers (or all papers if core_set < 15).

  • Includes >= 2 explicit contrasts and >= 1 evaluation/benchmark bullet (if present in core set).

Troubleshooting

Issue: snapshot feels empty / generic

Fix:

  • Increase papers/core_set.csv size (rerun retrieval/dedupe with broader queries.md ).

  • Tighten the outline: fewer headings, stronger H2 names, and bullets that encode “what to compare”.

Issue: snapshot reads like an outline narrator

Fix:

  • Delete all “This section ...” openers and replace with: Claim -> why it matters -> pointers .

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