front-matter-writer_skill

Overview

This skill writes front matter for a research survey (Abstract, Introduction, Related Work, Discussion, Conclusion) in a paper voice with high citation density and a single, explicit methodology paragraph. It enforces scope definition, a small set of organizing lenses, and an evidence-policy paragraph that states the time window, candidate pool, core set size, and evidence mode. The output is formatted to integrate cleanly into a paper and to reduce templated or "automation" language.

How this skill works

The skill inspects the project decisions and citation database to confirm approval and available references, then loads the outline and optional retrieval metadata to identify scope and citation anchors. It plans citations against the mapping and coverage reports and writes the five front-matter files so each fulfills its contract: a one-paragraph Abstract, a body-only Introduction containing the single methodology note, a body-only Related Work organized by lenses, a Discussion with cross-cutting synthesis, and a Conclusion with a tight thesis restatement and evaluation-first close. It validates all citation keys before use and avoids invented facts.

When to use it

• When you have C5 drafting permissions and need a coherent paper shell before fleshing subsections
• When the draft reads like stitched subsections and needs unified scope and lenses
• When you have a populated citations file and mapping that tie claims to evidence
• When you want a single, reproducible methodology paragraph rather than repeated disclaimers
• When you need paper-like, non-templated front matter to guide later detailed writing

Best practices

• Confirm the approval flag and that the citation file is present before invoking the skill
• Choose 3–5 stable lenses (e.g., interfaces, planning/memory, adaptation, evaluation/risks) and stick to them across front matter
• Place the methodology paragraph exactly once in Introduction or Related Work and keep it factual and concise
• Validate each citation key against the reference file; do not invent or infer missing citations
• Keep tone calm, academic, and content-bearing; replace outline narration with argument bridges

Example use cases

• Turn a rough draft into a publishable-feeling shell that clarifies what counts as an agent and why
• Produce a high-citation Abstract that highlights taxonomy and protocol-aware comparisons
• Write an Introduction that defines boundaries and embeds the single methodology statement
• Compose Related Work organized by chosen lenses rather than by prior-survey lists
• Create a Discussion that synthesizes cross-chapter evidence and recommends concrete verification steps