Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Acquires missing code repositories for the selected idea (Phase A) and conducts comprehensive code survey mapping academic concepts to implementations (Phase B). Outputs acquired_code_repos, updated_prepare_res, and model_survey for downstream use by inno-implementation-plan.
.claude/skills/inno-code-survey/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-21 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
Merges _acquire_missing_repos, _update_prepare_res_with_new_repos, and _conduct_code_survey from run_infer_idea_ours.py (lines 639–828, 1038–1052) into a single two-phase skill.
skills/inno-code-survey/
├── SKILL.md ← this file
├── prompts/
│ ├── build_repo_acquisition_query.md ← Phase A query template
│ └── build_code_survey_query.md ← Phase B query template
├── references/
│ ├── repo_acquisition_agent.md ← Phase A agent system prompt & tools
│ └── code_survey_agent.md ← Phase B agent system prompt & tools
└── scripts/
└── github_search_clone.py ← GitHub search + clone helperAll file paths use semantic directory names under the project root:
| Path | Contents | |------|----------| | Ideation/references/papers/ | Downloaded arXiv LaTeX sources (.tex, .txt, .md) | | Experiment/code_references/<repo_name>/ | Cloned GitHub repositories | | Experiment/code_references/model_survey.md | Code survey implementation report | | Experiment/code_references/logs/ | Phase A & B agent cache files |
These are aligned with outputs from inno-idea-generation and inno-prepare-resources:
| Input | Source | Description | |-------|--------|-------------| | selected_idea | Ideation/ideas/selected_idea.txt or final_selected_idea_data | The finalized selected idea (full markdown) | | download_res | inno-prepare-resources output | Result log from downloading arXiv paper sources | | prepare_res | inno-prepare-resources output (JSON) | Contains reference_codebases and reference_paths | | context_variables | Shared context dict | Accumulated pipeline context | | instance.json | <project_path>/instance.json | Paths are absolute when created by Dr. Claw (Experiment.code_references, Ideation.references); use as-is or resolve with path.join(project_path, value) if relative. Also date_limit from context. |
| Output | Description | Consumer | |--------|-------------|----------| | acquired_code_repos | Dict of {name: path} for newly cloned repos | Phase B, cache | | updated_prepare_res | prepare_res JSON with new repos merged into reference_codebases / reference_paths | Downstream pipeline | | extra_repo_info | Formatted string listing acquired repos | Phase B query | | model_survey | Comprehensive code survey implementation report | inno-experiment-dev |
> Full template & parameter docs: prompts/build_repo_acquisition_query.md > Agent system prompt & tools: references/repo_acquisition_agent.md
Maps to _acquire_missing_repos (lines 745–792) + _update_prepare_res_with_new_repos (lines 639–686).
Read selected_idea and identify 2–3 missing technical components — novel or specialized parts that are likely NOT in the standard repos already present in Experiment/code_references/.
For each missing component, perform 6 distinct queries using progressive decomposition:
Use the helper script or GitHub API directly:
bash# Option 1: Helper script python scripts/github_search_clone.py --query "sinkhorn attention pytorch" --limit 5 --date-limit 2025-12-31 # Option 2: Direct GitHub API via curl curl -s "https://api.github.com/search/repositories?q=sinkhorn+attention&per_page=5" \ -H "Accept: application/vnd.github.v3+json"
Clone the best candidate for each gap into Experiment/code_references/:
bashGIT_TERMINAL_PROMPT=0 git clone --depth 1 <clone_url> Experiment/code_references/<repo_name>
For each cloned repo:
README.md: cat Experiment/code_references/<repo_name>/README.mdacquired_code_repos and update prepare_resacquired_code_repos dict from verified clones:json { "repo_name_1": "Experiment/code_references/repo_name_1", "repo_name_2": "Experiment/code_references/repo_name_2" }
context_variables["acquired_code_repos"] = acquired_code_reposprepare_res JSON, ensure reference_codebases and reference_paths arrays existacquired_code_repos, if path not already in reference_paths:reference_codebasesreference_pathsupdated_prepare_resextra_repo_info string: (Empty string if no repos acquired)
Experiment/code_references/logs/repo_acquisition_agent.json:json { "context_variables": { "code_references_path": "<instance.Experiment.code_references if absolute (Dr. Claw), else path.join(project_path, ...)>", "references_path": "<instance.Ideation.references if absolute (Dr. Claw), else path.join(project_path, ...)>", "date_limit": "YYYY-MM-DD", "prepare_result": { ... }, "acquired_code_repos": { "<name>": "<path>", ... }, "updated_prepare_res": "<JSON string of updated prepare_res>" } }
> Full template & parameter docs: prompts/build_code_survey_query.md > Agent system prompt & tools: references/code_survey_agent.md
Maps to _conduct_code_survey (lines 794–828).
Construct the query using selected_idea, download_res, and extra_repo_info (from Phase A):
I have an innovative idea related to machine learning:
{selected_idea}
I have carefully gone through these papers' github repositories and found download
some of them in my local machine, in the directory `Experiment/code_references/`, use `ls`, `tree`,
and `find` to navigate the directory.
And I have also downloaded the corresponding paper (LaTeX sources, markdown, txt),
with the following information:
{download_res}
{extra_repo_info_block}
Your task is to carefully understand the innovative idea, and thoroughly review
codebases and generate a comprehensive implementation report for the innovative
idea. You can NOT stop to review the codebases until you have get all academic
concepts in the innovative idea.
Note that the code implementation should be as complete as possible.Experiment/code_references/Use Linux commands to navigate and read code:
| Action | Command | |--------|---------| | List repos | ls Experiment/code_references/ or tree Experiment/code_references/ -L 1 | | View repo structure | tree Experiment/code_references/<repo>/ -L 3 | | Find Python files | find Experiment/code_references/<repo>/ -name "*.py" -type f | | Read source file | cat Experiment/code_references/<repo>/model/attention.py | | Search across repos | rg "class.*Attention" Experiment/code_references/ or grep -rn "sinkhorn" Experiment/code_references/ | | Read specific lines | sed -n '100,200p' Experiment/code_references/<repo>/file.py |
For each atomic academic concept in the idea:
The report must include for each concept:
Set context_variables["model_survey"] = code_survey_response (the full implementation report text).
Write Experiment/code_references/logs/code_survey_agent.json:
json{ "context_variables": { "code_references_path": "<instance.Experiment.code_references if absolute (Dr. Claw), else path.join(project_path, ...)>", "references_path": "<instance.Ideation.references if absolute (Dr. Claw), else path.join(project_path, ...)>", "date_limit": "YYYY-MM-DD", "prepare_result": { ... }, "acquired_code_repos": { ... }, "notes": [ { "definition": "<atomic concept>", "math_formula": "<formula>", "code_implementation": "<code snippet>", "reference_papers": ["<paper1>"], "reference_codebases": ["<repo1>"] } ], "model_survey": "<FULL text of the comprehensive implementation report>" } }
IMPORTANT: The model_survey field must contain the complete report text — never a summary or abbreviation.
| Reference tool | Replacement | |---|---| | search_github_repos_wrapper | python scripts/github_search_clone.py --query "..." --limit 5 or curl to GitHub API | | tracked_execute_command (git clone) | GIT_TERMINAL_PROMPT=0 git clone --depth 1 <url> Experiment/code_references/<name> | | list_files | ls, find, tree | | read_file | cat, head, tail, sed -n | | gen_code_tree_structure | tree -L 3 | | terminal_page_down/up/to | N/A (not needed with cat/less) | | search_github_code | rg, grep -rn across local repos |
Experiment/code_references/context_variables["acquired_code_repos"] set as dict {name: path}prepare_res updated with new reference_codebases / reference_pathsextra_repo_info string built for Phase BExperiment/code_references/logs/repo_acquisition_agent.json writtenselected_idea + download_res + extra_repo_infoExperiment/code_references/ surveyed using tree, cat, grep, findcontext_variables["model_survey"] set with full report textExperiment/code_references/logs/code_survey_agent.json written with complete model_surveyrun_infer_idea_ours.py: _acquire_missing_repos (745–792), _update_prepare_res_with_new_repos (639–686), _conduct_code_survey (794–828)build_repo_acquisition_query (prompt_templates.py:153–171), build_code_survey_query (prompt_templates.py:173–200)repo_agent.py (Repo Acquisition Agent definition + tools), survey_agent.py (Code Survey Agent definition)repo_acquisition_agent.json, code_survey_agent.json from reference pipeline output| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-14 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-23 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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. 23 cases were attempted, and 18 counted toward the lift figure. The other 5 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 +39 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 18 comparable cases. 3 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.