abstract-skill

Purpose

This Skill generates or optimizes academic paper abstracts using the locked 5-sentence Farquhar formula: [1: Contribution], [2: Difficulty], [3: Method], [4: Evidence], [5: Key Result]. It operates on two mutually exclusive paths — generate a new abstract from raw materials (paper sections, bullet points, or a brief description), or restructure an existing abstract to comply with the formula. Both paths produce labeled output first so users can verify formula compliance sentence by sentence, followed by a clean plain-paragraph version ready for clipboard use. When a target journal is specified, journal-specific style conventions are applied.

Trigger

Activates when the user asks to:

Write, generate, or create an abstract from paper content
Optimize, restructure, or rewrite an existing abstract
Write an abstract, generate an abstract, rewrite an abstract, optimize an abstract

Example invocations:

"Write an abstract for my paper" / "帮我写摘要"
"Optimize my existing abstract" / "改写我的摘要"
"Restructure this abstract using the 5-sentence formula"
"Generate a CEUS-ready abstract from my introduction and results"

Modes

Mode	Default	Behavior
`direct`	Yes	Single-pass abstract output using the 5-sentence formula
`batch`		Not supported — abstract requires full paper context

Default mode: direct. User provides content and receives labeled + clean abstract in one pass.

Path selection (within direct mode):

Input reads like a formed abstract → restructure path
Input is raw content (sections, bullets, "my paper is about...") → generate path
Ambiguous → ask before proceeding

References

Required (always loaded)

File	Purpose
`references/expression-patterns.md`	Academic expression patterns overview

Leaf Hints (loaded when needed)

File	When to Load
`references/expression-patterns/introduction-and-gap.md`	Contribution and gap framing (sentences 1-2)
`references/expression-patterns/conclusions-and-claims.md`	Calibrated claim language (sentences 1 and 5)
`references/expression-patterns/methods-and-data.md`	Method description (sentence 3, when weak)
`references/expression-patterns/results-and-discussion.md`	Evidence and result framing (sentences 4-5)

Journal Template (conditional)

When user specifies a target journal, load references/journals/[journal].md.
If template missing, refuse: "Journal template for [X] not found. Available: CEUS."
If no journal specified, ask once; if declined, apply general academic style.

Ask Strategy

Before starting, ask about:

Path: does the user have an existing abstract to restructure, or raw content to generate from? (skip if clear from input)
Target journal if not specified (ask once; if declined, use general academic style)
Word limit if known (typically 150-300 words; ask once)

Path inference:

User pastes text that reads like an abstract → restructure path
User provides sections, bullets, or "my paper is about..." → generate path
Ambiguous → ask: "Do you have an existing abstract to restructure, or shall I generate one from your materials?"

Rules:

Never ask more than 2 questions before starting.
Skip path question if inference is clear from input.
In direct mode with sufficient context, proceed without pre-questions.

Workflow

Step 1: Collect Context

Load references/expression-patterns.md overview.
If journal specified, load references/journals/[journal].md. If missing, refuse with: "Journal template for [X] not found. Available: CEUS."
Read user input: file via Read tool, or pasted text from conversation.
Determine path: restructure if input reads like a formed abstract; generate if raw materials. Ask if ambiguous.

Step 2a: Generate Path (raw content provided)

Load references/expression-patterns/introduction-and-gap.md for contribution and gap framing.
Load references/expression-patterns/conclusions-and-claims.md for calibrated claim language.
Load references/expression-patterns/methods-and-data.md if the user's method description is weak.
Synthesize sentence 1 (contribution): start with "We introduce / propose / demonstrate / show..."
Synthesize sentence 2 (difficulty): why this problem is hard or why it matters.
Synthesize sentence 3 (method): how the problem is solved, with key technical terminology.
Load references/expression-patterns/results-and-discussion.md for sentences 4-5.
Synthesize sentence 4 (evidence): what was measured, on what benchmark or dataset.
Synthesize sentence 5 (key result): the most important number or qualitative outcome.

Step 2b: Restructure Path (existing abstract provided)

Load the same leaf hints as the generate path.
Map each existing sentence to one of the 5 formula positions.
Rewrite each sentence to tighten formula compliance while preserving the user's content.
Internal audit: After restructuring, verify all 5 positions are filled.
Flag any missing position with [MISSING: position-name] — never silently drop content.

Step 3: Output

Present the labeled version first (formula positions explicit, see Output Contract).
Present the clean version (plain paragraph, no labels) separated by ---.
If the user wants to save: offer to write to a file using the Write tool.
If word limit was specified, report word count; warn if over limit.
Optionally recommend the Polish Skill for further expression refinement.

Output Contract

Output	Format	Condition
`labeled_abstract`	Labeled 5-sentence block with `[N: Position]` markers	Always
`clean_abstract`	Plain paragraph with no labels, separated by `---`	Always
Word count	Integer	When user specified a word limit

Exact labeled format:

[1: Contribution] We propose...
[2: Difficulty] Despite growing interest in X, existing approaches fail to...
[3: Method] We address this by...
[4: Evidence] Evaluated on N datasets...
[5: Key Result] Our approach achieves...

---
Clean version:
We propose... Despite growing interest in X, existing approaches fail to... We address this by... Evaluated on N datasets... Our approach achieves...

Edge Cases

Situation	Handling
Input is ambiguous (not clearly raw content or existing abstract)	Ask before proceeding: "Do you have an existing abstract to restructure, or shall I generate one?"
Existing abstract has fewer than 5 sentences	Run restructure path; flag missing positions with `[MISSING: ...]`
User specifies word limit	Count words in output; warn if over limit with exact count
Journal specified but template missing	Refuse: "Journal template for [X] not found. Available: CEUS."
Formula position cannot be filled from available content	Flag with `[MISSING: difficulty statement]`; do not invent content
User provides only a title or one-sentence summary	Ask for more content before proceeding

Fallbacks

Scenario	Fallback
Structured Interaction unavailable	Ask 1-2 plain-text questions (path + journal)
Expression pattern leaf missing	Proceed with general academic register; warn user
Journal template missing (no journal specified)	Ask once; if declined, use general academic style
Write tool fails	Present output in conversation instead

Examples

Invocation: "Help me restructure my abstract to follow the 5-sentence formula."

User pastes: "In this paper we study urban mobility patterns using GPS data. We find that mobility is highly predictable. We propose a model called MobNet. It outperforms existing approaches by 12% on the next-location prediction task."

Output:

[1: Contribution] We propose MobNet, a model for predicting urban mobility using GPS data.
[2: Difficulty] Despite the prevalence of GPS data, existing mobility models fail to capture [MISSING: difficulty statement — why prediction is hard or why existing approaches fall short].
[3: Method] MobNet addresses this by [MISSING: method description — how MobNet works].
[4: Evidence] Evaluated on a next-location prediction task using GPS traces from urban environments.
[5: Key Result] MobNet outperforms existing approaches by 12% on next-location prediction.

---
Clean version:
We propose MobNet, a model for predicting urban mobility using GPS data. [MISSING: difficulty statement]. MobNet addresses this by [MISSING: method description]. Evaluated on a next-location prediction task using GPS traces from urban environments. MobNet outperforms existing approaches by 12% on next-location prediction.

Two formula positions are flagged as missing. Please provide: (1) why mobility prediction is hard or what existing approaches fail to do, and (2) a brief description of how MobNet works.

Skill: abstract-skill Conventions: references/skill-conventions.md