Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Step 2 of the PaperOrchestra pipeline (arXiv:2604.05018). Execute the visualization plan from outline.json — render plots and conceptual diagrams from experimental_log.md and idea.md, optionally refine via VLM critique loop, and produce context-aware captions. Runs in parallel with the literature-review-agent. TRIGGER when the orchestrator delegates Step 2 or when the user asks to "generate the figures for my paper" or "render the plots from this experiment log".
.claude/skills/bilal140202-plotting-agent/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 39% | 0% |
| case-12 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 7% | 0% |
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 65% | 0% |
| case-17 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 81% | 0% |
| case-18 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 100% | 0% |
Faithful implementation of the Plotting Agent from PaperOrchestra (Song et al., 2026, arXiv:2604.05018, §4 Step 2 and App. F.1 p.45).
Cost: ~20–30 LLM calls. The paper uses PaperBanana (Zhu et al., 2026) as the default backbone with a closed-loop VLM-critique refinement. This skill expresses that loop in host-agent terms: you (the host agent) generate matplotlib code with your own LLM, render via your Bash/Python tool, optionally critique the rendered PNG with your vision model, redraw, and finally caption.
workspace/outline.json — specifically the plotting_plan arrayworkspace/inputs/idea.md and workspace/inputs/experimental_log.md —the source data
workspace/inputs/figures/ — optional pre-existing figures (PlotOn mode)workspace/figures/<figure_id>.png — one PNG per plotting_plan entry(300 DPI, sized to the requested aspect ratio)
workspace/figures/captions.json — {figure_id: caption_text} mapfigure_id)outline.json:json { "figure_id": "fig_main_results", "title": "Main Results on Dataset X", "plot_type": "plot", "data_source": "experimental_log.md", "objective": "Visual summary (Grouped Bar Chart) demonstrating ...", "aspect_ratio": "5:4" }
references/chart-patterns.md (for plot_type=="plot") or references/diagram-patterns.md (for plot_type=="diagram").
idea.md and/or experimental_log.md(data_source field tells you which) to obtain the numeric values or conceptual entities the figure needs. For experimental_log.md, the ## 2. Raw Numeric Data section contains markdown tables.
If PAPERBANANA_PATH is set — use the PaperBanana backbone (Zhu et al., 2026). It runs a Retriever → Planner → Stylist → Visualizer → Critic loop and is especially good for plot_type == "diagram". See references/paperbanana-cookbook.md for setup (needs a Gemini API key).
bash python skills/plotting-agent/scripts/paperbanana_render.py \ --figure-id <figure_id> \ --caption "<objective from figure spec>" \ --content-file workspace/inputs/idea.md \ --task <diagram|plot> \ --aspect-ratio <aspect_ratio> \ --out workspace/figures/<figure_id>.png
Otherwise — write a matplotlib script and run it via your Bash tool, or use the bundled helper: bash python skills/plotting-agent/scripts/render_matplotlib.py \ --spec spec.json \ --out workspace/figures/<figure_id>.png The script must apply the academic style from chart-patterns.md, use the correct pixel size from aspect-ratios.md, save at 300 DPI, and call plt.close() after savefig.
objective from the outline. Look for:visual artifacts, mislabeled axes, illegible text, color clashes, misleading scaling, missing legend, overlapping labels.
and re-render. Cap at 3 critique iterations per figure.
PaperBanana. See references/plotting-pipeline.md for the full loop description.
figure will still render correctly, just without iterative refinement.
references/caption-prompt.md. Inputs to the caption prompt:
task_name — the section the figure belongs to (e.g., "Methodology","Experiments")
raw_content — the surrounding section text (or content_bullets fromthe section_plan if the section isn't drafted yet)
description — the objective field from the figure specfigure_desc — a 1-sentence description of what the rendered figureactually shows (from your VLM critique pass, or from the script's plan if no vision)
Write the caption to workspace/figures/captions.json keyed by figure_id. Captions must NOT contain Figure N: or Caption N: prefixes — the LaTeX template handles numbering. Plain text only, no markdown.
For plot_type == "diagram", prefer PaperBanana when available — its Retriever grounds the Planner in real published paper diagrams. If PAPERBANANA_PATH is unset, follow references/diagram-patterns.md. Patterns include block diagrams, system overviews, flowcharts, and algorithm-as-graph. The bundled helper:
bashpython skills/plotting-agent/scripts/render_diagram.py \ --spec diagram_spec.json \ --out workspace/figures/<figure_id>.png
handles the simple cases (boxes-and-arrows). For complex Fig-1-style overview diagrams, write matplotlib patches code yourself.
step on conference templates.
aspect_ratio is one of 12enumerated strings. Use the pixel targets in references/aspect-ratios.md.
chart-patterns.md.Never use matplotlib defaults (too saturated for print).
penalize these.
captions.json. The SectionWriting Agent will fail-stop if a caption is missing for any figure referenced from the outline.
Figure N: prefix in captions — LaTeX adds it.hallucinate axes, baselines, or trends. Source-of-truth is experimental_log.md or idea.md.
If workspace/inputs/figures/ is non-empty, check whether any pre-existing file matches a figure_id in the outline (by filename prefix). If so, copy it into workspace/figures/ as-is and still generate a caption using the caption prompt. Only generate from scratch the figure_ids that have no pre-existing counterpart.
references/caption-prompt.md — verbatim Caption Generation prompt from App. F.1references/plotting-pipeline.md — the full few-shot → render → critique → caption loopreferences/chart-patterns.md — matplotlib style + chart type recipesreferences/diagram-patterns.md — conceptual diagram recipesreferences/aspect-ratios.md — pixel targets for each of the 12 allowed ratios at 300 DPIreferences/paperbanana-cookbook.md — NEW PaperBanana setup, usage, cost notes, attributionscripts/render_matplotlib.py — render a JSON plot spec → PNG (matplotlib fallback)scripts/render_diagram.py — render a JSON diagram spec → PNG (matplotlib fallback)scripts/paperbanana_render.py — NEW PaperBanana backbone wrapper (reads PAPERBANANA_PATH from env)| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→fail | 4,665 | 6,012 | +29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 246 | 2,379 | +867% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 6,261 | 7,092 | +13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 222 | 2,315 | +943% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 7,211 | 5,695 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 270 | 2,338 | +766% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | 11,104 | 6,243 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,884 | 2,960 | +57% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 10,243 | 3,454 | -66% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,629 | 2,501 | +54% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 11,680 | 3,488 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,806 | 2,519 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 13,867 | 6,259 | -55% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,086 | 2,907 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | 5,803 | 2,604 | -55% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 786 | 2,470 | +214% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 10,478 | 1,729 | -83% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,427 | 2,230 | +56% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 32,139 | 8,505 | -74% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,415 | 3,360 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 22,309 | 2,271 | -90% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,799 | 2,347 | +30% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 14,365 | 3,026 | -79% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,364 | 2,533 | +7% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 9,794 | 2,858 | -71% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,390 | 2,299 | +65% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | 14,387 | 2,154 | -85% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,184 | 2,283 | +5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | 9,529 | 1,702 | -82% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,412 | 2,242 | +59% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 6,372 | 1,943 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,003 | 2,256 | +125% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 10,771 | 4,703 | -56% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,526 | 2,757 | +81% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 8,241 | 1,322 | -84% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,094 | 2,183 | +100% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 11,079 | 4,577 | -59% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,599 | 2,667 | +67% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | fail→pass | 10,824 | 2,436 | -77% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,932 | 2,390 | +24% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | 12,836 | 2,079 | -84% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,995 | 2,307 | +16% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | 3,975 | 18,156 | +357% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 285 | 5,110 | +1693% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | fail→fail | 27,663 | 21,805 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 5,012 | 5,946 | +19% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-24 | fail→fail | 8,894 | 11,737 | +32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,502 | 4,360 | +190% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 24 cases were attempted, and 21 counted toward the lift figure. The other 3 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +29 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 21 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.