
Paper Argument Planner
- 42 installs
- 1 repo stars
- Updated July 31, 2026
- jurgendn/agent-skills
Helps with productivity & planning tasks.
About
paper-argument-planner is a Claude Code skill for productivity & planning. It helps solo builders move faster with AI-assisted development.
- paper-argument-planner
- Productivity & Planning
- AI-coding skill
Paper Argument Planner by the numbers
- 42 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #1,711 of 3,282 Productivity & Planning skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 2, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/jurgendn/agent-skills --skill paper-argument-plannerAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 42 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 1 |
| Last updated | July 31, 2026 |
| Repository | jurgendn/agent-skills ↗ |
What it does
Helps with productivity & planning tasks.
Files
Paper Argument Planner
A paper is not a list of experiments. It is an argument that a reader can follow, object to, and eventually believe. This skill helps turn research material into that argument before drafting prose.
Use this when
- The user has an idea, result set, outline, abstract, or rough draft and asks how to make it into a paper.
- The contribution is unclear or too broad.
- Experiments exist but the story does not.
- The user needs to decide what each section should prove.
- The paper has too many claims, disconnected tables, or weak motivation.
Do not use this for
- Polishing finished prose sentence by sentence. Use a writing/editing skill instead.
- Writing a source-grounded literature survey. Use
literature-triangulationorrelated-work-writer. - Checking whether results are reproducible. Use
reproducibility-audit. - Strategic rebuttal to reviewers. Use
reviewer-response-strategist.
Workflow
1. Extract the raw material
Identify, without embellishing:
- Problem: what is hard, missing, or misunderstood?
- Proposed idea or method: what did the authors do?
- Evidence: what results, proofs, ablations, or analyses exist?
- Audience: which community must be convinced?
- Constraint: venue, page limit, deadline, available experiments.
If these are missing, ask targeted questions instead of inventing them.
2. State the argument spine
Write the paper's argument in this form:
Because [problem/gap], we need [capability or understanding].
Existing work fails because [specific limitation].
This paper contributes [method/claim/analysis].
The key evidence is [main result + supporting result + stress test].
Therefore readers should believe [bounded conclusion].The spine should be narrow enough that one paper can actually support it.
3. Separate claims by strength
Classify each claim:
- Main claim — the paper lives or dies on this.
- Supporting claim — needed to make the main claim believable.
- Mechanism claim — explains why the method works.
- Scope claim — where it works and where it does not.
- Speculative claim — interesting but not established; move to discussion or remove.
For each claim, require evidence. If evidence is missing, mark it explicitly.
4. Build the section logic
Create a section plan where every section has a job:
- Abstract — compressed problem, contribution, evidence, implication.
- Introduction — why the problem matters, what gap exists, what this paper proves.
- Related Work — how prior work creates the gap or contrast.
- Method / Theory — what is new enough to understand the contribution.
- Experiments / Results — evidence for each claim, in order of importance.
- Analysis / Ablations — why the result happens and what alternatives fail.
- Limitations — bounded honesty, not self-sabotage.
- Conclusion — what changed after reading the paper.
Do not include a section just because papers usually have one. Include it because it performs a necessary role in the argument.
5. Plan figures and tables as evidence
For each proposed figure or table, specify:
- claim it supports
- expected reader takeaway
- required comparison or control
- whether it belongs in main paper or appendix
Decorative figures are liabilities. If a figure does not support a claim, cut it or move it to appendix.
6. Stress-test reader objections
List the strongest likely objections:
- novelty objection
- baseline fairness objection
- generality/scope objection
- mechanism objection
- missing ablation objection
- reproducibility objection
For each, say whether the current paper answers it with evidence, prose, or neither.
Output format
Use this structure:
# Paper Argument Plan
## One-sentence thesis
## Argument spine
## Claim hierarchy
| Claim | Type | Evidence | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
## Section plan
## Figure/table plan
| Artifact | Claim supported | Takeaway | Main/appendix |
|---|---|---|---|
## Weak spots
## Next actionsQuality bar
A good plan should make the paper easier to reject or accept. If the argument is vague enough that no experiment could falsify it, sharpen it before writing prose.
{
"skill_name": "paper-argument-planner",
"evals": [
{
"id": 1,
"prompt": "I have results for a paper: our small retrieval model beats a larger baseline on biomedical QA when the query contains rare terminology, but loses on general QA. We also have an ablation showing terminology-aware negative sampling matters. Help me structure the paper argument and decide what claims we can safely make.",
"expected_output": "A paper argument plan with thesis, claim hierarchy, section plan, figure/table plan, weak spots, and next actions.",
"files": []
},
{
"id": 2,
"prompt": "My draft has a method section and five experiment tables, but reviewers of an earlier version said the contribution was unclear. The method is basically contrastive pretraining with a curriculum. Can you find the argument spine and tell me what each section should prove?",
"expected_output": "A structured argument spine that narrows the contribution and maps sections and evidence to claims.",
"files": []
},
{
"id": 3,
"prompt": "I want to turn this workshop project into a full paper. We have one strong benchmark result, one failed transfer result, and some qualitative examples. What is the honest paper story?",
"expected_output": "A calibrated paper narrative that separates main, supporting, scope, and speculative claims.",
"files": []
}
]
}