Turn a vague research direction into a problem-anchored, elegant, frontier-aware, implementation-oriented method plan via iterative GPT-5.4 review.
SkillScore78Maintained
Automatic
◆Research pack
Last verified 8/11/2026
What it changes
Passed 15 of 19 test cases with the skill, and 6 of 19 without it.
Without skill30%
With skill78%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
Specifies gpt-5.4 as the reviewer model.
Includes Complexity Budget as a required subsection.
Weights Problem Fidelity at 15% and Feasibility at 10%.
and 17 more in the full report
13 fixed5 passed either way3 still failing2 broke
Pass-rate lift
+48 pp
Tokens
+316%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-25%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/11/2026v418 of 23 cases passed with skill · 19 comparable
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 12 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 12
Prompt
In Step 1.1, the proposal writer scans local literature in papers/ and literature/ to identify technical gaps. How many local papers or notes should be scanned at most for grounding?
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
Caps the maximum local grounding papers or notes to scan at 15.
Missed
Passed
case-19 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/11/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md704 linessingle file
Research Refine: Problem-Anchored, Elegant, Frontier-Aware Plan Refinement
Refine and concretize: $ARGUMENTS
Overview
Use this skill when the research problem is already visible but the technical route is still fuzzy. The goal is not to produce a bloated proposal or a benchmark shopping list. The goal is to turn a vague direction into a problem -> focused method -> minimal validation document that is concrete enough to implement, elegant enough to feel paper-worthy, and current enough to resonate in the foundation-model era.
Four principles dominate this skill:
Do not lose the original problem. Freeze an immutable Problem Anchor and reuse it in every round.
The smallest adequate mechanism wins. Prefer the minimal intervention that directly fixes the bottleneck.
One paper, one dominant contribution. Prefer one sharp thesis plus at most one supporting contribution.
Modern leverage is a prior, not a decoration. When LLM / VLM / Diffusion / RL / distillation / inference-time scaling naturally fit the bottleneck, use them concretely. Do not bolt them on as buzzwords.
User input (PROBLEM + vague APPROACH)
-> Phase 0 (Local step): Freeze Problem Anchor
-> Phase 1 (Local step): Scan grounding papers -> identify technical gap -> choose the sharpest route -> write focused proposal
-> Phase 2 (Codex/GPT-5.4): Review for fidelity, specificity, contribution quality, and frontier leverage
-> Phase 3 (Local step): Anchor check + simplicity check -> revise method -> rewrite full proposal
-> Phase 4 (Codex, same agent): Re-evaluate revised proposal
-> Repeat Phase 3-4 until OVERALL SCORE >= 9 or MAX_ROUNDS reached
-> Phase 5: Save full history to refine-logs/
-> Optional handoff: /experiment-plan for a detailed execution-ready experiment roadmap
Constants
REVIEWER_MODEL = gpt-5.4 — Reviewer model used via a secondary Codex agent.
MAX_ROUNDS = 5 — Maximum review-revise rounds.
SCORE_THRESHOLD = 9 — Minimum overall score to stop.
OUTPUT_DIR = refine-logs/ — Directory for round files and final report.
MAX_LOCAL_PAPERS = 15 — Maximum local papers/notes to scan for grounding.
MAX_CORE_EXPERIMENTS = 3 — Default cap for core validation blocks inside this skill.
MAX_PRIMARY_CLAIMS = 2 — Soft cap for paper-level claims. Prefer one dominant claim plus one supporting claim.
MAX_NEW_TRAINABLE_COMPONENTS = 2 — Soft cap for genuinely new trainable pieces. Exceed only if the paper breaks otherwise.
Override via argument if needed, e.g. /research-refine "problem | approach" -- max rounds: 3, threshold: 9.
Run an end-to-end workflow that chains `research-refine` and `experiment-plan`. Use when the user wants a one-shot pipeline from vague research direction to focused final proposal plus detailed experiment roadmap, or asks to "串起来", build a pipeline, do it end-to-end, or generate both the method and experiment plan together.