**End-to-end pipeline from structured research input to a full manuscript plan (一条龙 Pipeline)** BioClaw integration notes: - This skill is staged under `container/skills/` as part of a multi-skill manuscript pipeline. - Shared templates and helper scripts are available under the sibling directory `bio-manuscript-common/`. - When this pipeline needs supporting capabilities, prefer the copied BioClaw sibling skills in `container/skills/` over any `~/.openclaw/...` layout assumptions. - This ski...
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add BioTender-max/awesome-bio-agent-skills --skill bio-manuscript-pipeline --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Bio Manuscript Pipeline?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/biotender-max-bio-manuscript-pipeline)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
# bio-manuscript-pipeline
**End-to-end pipeline from structured research input to a full manuscript plan (一条龙 Pipeline)**
BioClaw integration notes:
- This skill is staged under `container/skills/` as part of a multi-skill manuscript pipeline.
- Shared templates and helper scripts are available under the sibling directory `bio-manuscript-common/`.
- When this pipeline needs supporting capabilities, prefer the copied BioClaw sibling skills in `container/skills/` over any `~/.openclaw/...` layout assumptions.
- This skill family is being integrated as a BioClaw community-contributed workflow.
- Upstream source reference: https://github.com/donghongyu2020/bio-manuscript-forge/tree/main/bio-manuscript-forge
- Contributor reference for attribution and documentation: Hongyu Dong, Westlake University PhD candidate, BioClaw community contributor / BioClaw community co-creation contributor.
- In BioClaw, treat the sibling manuscript skills as stepwise companion skills. You should explicitly follow their guidance phase by phase rather than assuming an automatic runtime dispatcher.
- If a later phase depends on outputs from an earlier phase, write those outputs into the group workspace first and then continue with the next sibling skill using those artifacts as context.
- At the end of each substantial run, also write a concise human-readable execution summary. Prefer `FINAL_EXEC_SUMMARY.md`; for integration-focused runs, also write `INTEGRATION_TEST_REPORT.md`.
---
## Welcome
Welcome to Bio-Manuscript-Forge. This workflow helps turn a rough research idea into a manuscript-ready planning package.
### Input Template
Provide your project in the following structure:
```text
topic: [research topic]
base_work:
- paper: [related paper link]
- code: [related code repository]
innovation: [one-sentence innovation summary]
- algorithmic novelty (算法创新性): [core method novelty]
- tasks (任务): [task1, task2, task3, ...]
- data (数据): [dataset source or type]
- benchmark: [evaluation benchmark]
- metrics (计算指标): [metric1, metric2, ...]
- biological analyses (生物学分析手段): [how biological significance will be shown]
demo_data: [demo dataset link]
target_journal: [optional, default nat-communications]
num_refine_rounds: [optional, default 2]
```
### Example Input
```
topic: spatial multi-omics integration
base_work:
- paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41592-021-01336-8
- code: https://github.com/broadinstitute/Tangram
innovation: jointly align spatial transcriptomics and proteomics while preserving tissue-domain boundaries
- algorithmic novelty (算法创新性): boundary-aware cross-modal alignment with explicit domain-consistency regularization
- tasks (任务): cell annotation, spatial domain detection, cross-modal integration, biological interpretation
- data (数据): public spatial transcriptomics and spatial proteomics cohorts with matched single-cell references
- benchmark: compare against mapping, domain, and integration baselines on public tumor datasets
- metrics (计算指标): ARI, NMI, Macro-F1, boundary preservation score, biological consistency
- biological analyses (生物学分析手段):
- marker recovery across modalities
- pathway enrichment consistency
- neighborhood preservation
- tissue-boundary case studies
demo_data: https://zenodo.org/record/0000000
target_journal: nat-communications
num_refine_rounds: 2
```
### Expected Outputs
| File | Content |
|------|---------|
| **PPT** | Lab meeting / progress presentation |
| **FINAL_PROPOSAL** | Full research proposal |
| **Figure 2-7 (v3)** | Detailed task-wise figure designs |
| **Manuscript text (v2)** | Introduction, Results, Discussion, Methods |
---
Provide the project description and the pipeline can begin.
---
## Purpose
Run the full manuscript pipeline, generate a journal-style plan, and iteratively refine it through reviewer-style feedback.
## Input Schema
```text
topic: [research topic]
base_work: [paper links + code links]
innovation: [high-level innovation summary]
- algorithmic novelty (算法创新性): [core algorithmic novelty]
- tasks (任务): [downstream tasks, comma-separated]
- data (数据): [dataset source / type]
- benchmark: [benchmark dataset or evaluation setup]
- metrics (计算指标): [safety + task metrics such as ASR, ARI, etc.]
- biological analyses (生物学分析手段): [marker genes, pathways, neighborhood analysis, etc.]
demo_data: [demo dataset link]
target_journal: [optional, default nat-communications]
num_refine_rounds: [optional, default 2]
```
### Example Input (public-safe sample)
```
topic: spatial multi-omics integration
base_work:
- paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41592-021-01336-8
- code: https://github.com/broadinstitute/Tangram
innovation: jointly align spatial transcriptomics and proteomics while preserving tissue-domain boundaries
- algorithmic novelty (算法创新性): boundary-aware cross-modal alignment with explicit domain-consistency regularization
- tasks (任务): cell annotation, spatial domain detection, cross-modal integration, biological interpretation
- data (数据): public spatial transcriptomics and spatial proteomics cohorts with matched single-cell references
- benchmark: compare against mapping, domain, and integration baselines on public tumor datasets
- metrics (计算指标): ARI, NMI, Macro-F1, boundary preservation score, biological consistency
- biological analyses (生物学分析手段):
- marker recovery across modalities
- pathway enrichment consistency
- neighborhood preservation
- tissue-boundary case studies
demo_data: https://zenodo.org/record/0000000
target_journal: nat-communications
num_refine_rounds: 2
```
### Field Guide
| Field | Required | Description |
|------|----------|-------------|
| topic | yes | concise research topic |
| base_work | yes | paper + code links |
| innovation | yes | high-level idea plus structured subfields |
| demo_data | yes | demo dataset link |
| target_journal | no | default `nat-communications` |
| num_refine_rounds | no | default `2` |
### Innovation Subfields
| Subfield | Description | Example |
|----------|-------------|---------|
| algorithmic novelty (算法创新性) | core method novelty | attention entropy, loss redesign, architecture change |
| tasks (任务) | downstream tasks covered | cell annotation, perturbation, GRN inference |
| data (数据) | dataset source / type | public cohorts, user data, target tissue |
| benchmark | evaluation setup | existing benchmark or new benchmark |
| metrics (计算指标) | safety + task metrics | ASR, Accuracy, F1, ARI, Pearson |
| biological analyses (生物学分析手段) | how biology will be demonstrated | marker gene, pathway, regulatory links |
## Execution Flow
### Phase 1: System building (Steps 1-5)
**Input parsing**: first extract the key signals from user input:
- `topic` → 用于创新性搜索
- `base_work` → 提取已有工作数据集、指标、方法
- `innovation.algorithmic novelty` / `innovation.算法创新性` -> novelty assessment
- `innovation.tasks` / `innovation.任务` -> task system design
- `innovation.data` / `innovation.数据` -> dataset search direction
- `innovation.metrics` / `innovation.计算指标` -> metric system design
- `innovation.biological analyses` / `innovation.生物学分析手段` -> analysis system design
```
Step 1: 创新性检测
├─ 解析输入:topic, base_work, innovation.算法创新性
├─ 调用 searxng/web_search 搜索
├─ Topic 同义变换生成 10-20 个变体
├─ 搜索 PubMed + bioRxiv + arXiv q-bio
├─ 统计相似文章数量
├─ 结合 innovation.算法创新性 判断创新性级别
└─ 输出:01_INNOVATION_ASSESSMENT.md
Step 2: 任务体系构建
├─ 解析输入:innovation.任务
├─ 若用户提供任务列表 → 直接使用
├─ 若未提供 → 搜索领域主要任务分类
├─ 识别任务层级(Level 1-4)
├─ 确保难度递进
└─ 输出:02_TASK_SYSTEM.md
Step 3: 数据集搜索
├─ 解析输入:innovation.数据, innovation.benchmark, demo_data
├─ 若用户提供数据描述 → 搜索匹配数据集
├─ 从 base_work 论文提取数据集
├─ 数据集与任务匹配
└─ 输出:03_DATASET_CATALOG.md
Step 4: 指标体系构建
├─ 解析输入:innovation.计算指标
├─ 若用户提供指标 → 直接使用并补充
├─ 若未提供 → 从已有工作提取指标
├─ 分类:安全指标 + 任务指标
└─ 输出:04_METRIC_SYSTEM.md
Step 5: 分析方法体系
├─ 解析输入:innovation.生物学分析手段
├─ 若用户提供分析手段 → 直接使用并补充
├─ 若未提供 → 从已有工作提取分析方法
├─ 标注 OmicsClaw/Bioclaw skill
├─ 说明为什么用、证明什么、体现什么生物学意义
└─ 输出:05_ANALYSIS_SYSTEM.md
```
### Phase 2: 设计与文案(Steps 6-7)
**⚠️ 核心原则**:
1. **任务为先**:Figure 2-N 每个对应一个任务,数据/指标/分析随任务而定
2. **分析增强**:每个 Figure 必须包含安全 + 生物学分析
3. **文案同步**:Figure 改完立即更新 Results
```
Step 6: Figure 设计
│
├─ Figure 1:算法创新性(方法框架)
│ ├─ Panel a:方法 Overview
│ ├─ Panel b:创新点示意
│ ├─ Panel c:模型覆盖
│ ├─ Panel d:任务覆盖
│ └─ Panel e:指标体系
│
├─ Figure 2-N:每个 Figure = 一个任务 ⭐ 任务为先原则
│ │
│ ├─ Panel a: 任务 Overview(数据流)
│ │
│ ├─ Panel b-d: 定量测评
│ │ ├─ 多模型对比
│ │ ├─ ASR 降低
│ │ └─ 任务指标保持
│ │
│ ├─ Panel e: Technical analysis ⭐ must include
│ │ ├─ representation pattern shifts
│ │ ├─ error / uncertainty analysis
│ │ └─ failure-mode or boundary-case inspection
│ │
│ ├─ Panel f: 生物学分析 ⭐ 必须包含
│ │ ├─ Marker gene recovery
│ │ ├─ Pathway preservation
│ │ └─ 具体生物学意义
│ │
│ ├─ Panel g: In-depth case studies ⭐ 1-2 cases
│ │ ├─ concrete biological question
│ │ ├─ baseline vs proposed method comparison
│ │ └─ interpretation of recovered biological structure
│ │
│ └─ 数据/指标/分析依据任务选取
│
├─ Figure N+1: Summary + 生物学意义总结
│
└─ 输出:06_FIGURE_DESIGNS/
Step 6.5: 文案同步检查 ⭐ 必须
├─ Figure 有这个 Panel → Results 有对应段落?
├─ Figure 有这个案例 → Results 有详细展开?
└─ 检查通过才能进入下一步
Step 7: 论文文案生成
│
├─ Introduction(5段)
│ ├─ 第一段:领域介绍
│ ├─ 第二段:相关工作调研
│ ├─ 第三段:现有方法不足
│ ├─ 第四段:本文方法介绍
│ └─ 第五段:意义与应用
│
├─ Results(与 Figure 对应)⭐ 结构对齐
│ ├─ 2.1 Overview(对应 Figure 1)
│ ├─ 2.2 Task 1 / Main claim(对应 Figure 2)
│ │ ├─ quantitative evaluation
│ │ ├─ technical analysis
│ │ ├─ biological analysis
│ │ └─ case study
│ ├─ 2.3 Task 2 / Main claim(对应 Figure 3)
│ ├─ ...每个任务一个 section
│ └─ 2.N Summary(对应最后一个 Figure)
│
├─ Discussion
│ ├─ 方法优势总结
│ ├─ 安全-生物学结合意义 ⭐
│ ├─ 与现有方法对比
│ ├─ 方法局限性
│ └─ 未来方向
│
├─ Methods
│ ├─ 数据预处理
│ ├─ 模型架构
│ ├─ 任务特定方法 ⭐ 按任务组织
│ ├─ 生物学分析方法 ⭐
│ ├─ 统计分析
│ └─ 代码与数据可用性
│
└─ 输出:07_MANUSCRIPT_TEXT/
```
**Figure 设计检查清单**:
```
- [ ] Figure 1 是方法框架?
- [ ] Figure 2-N 每个对应一个任务?
- [ ] 每个 Figure 包含多模型对比?
- [ ] 每个 Figure 有定量测评 Panel?
- [ ] 每个 Figure 有安全分析 Panel? ⭐
- [ ] 每个 Figure 有生物学分析 Panel? ⭐
- [ ] 每个 Figure 有 1-2 个深入案例? ⭐
- [ ] 分析手段多样化?
- [ ] Results 结构与 Figure 对应? ⭐
```
### Phase 2.5: Refine Loop ⭐
```
Step 7.5: 三审稿人迭代优化
│
├─ Round 0: 保存初始方案
│ └─ 输出:refine-logs/round-0-initial-proposal.md
│
├─ Round 1 Review:
│ ├─ Editor Review(创新性评估,Nature子刊标准)
│ │ ├─ 概念创新 / 方法创新 / 应用创新
│ │ └─ 评分:创新性 / 可行性 / 推荐度
│ │
│ ├─ 计算审稿人 Review(算法/方法评审)
│ │ ├─ 算法设计合理性 / 方法创新性
│ │ ├─ 实验设计严谨性(Baseline/指标/Ablation)
│ │ └─ 评分:方法创新 / 技术严谨 / 代码可行
│ │
│ ├─ 生物分析审稿人 Review(生物学意义评审)
│ │ ├─ 生物学意义 / 分析设计合理性
│ │ ├─ 数据集选择合理性
│ │ └─ 评分:生物意义 / 分析设计 / 数据选择
│ │
│ └─ 输出:refine-logs/round-1/
│
├─ Round 1 Refinement:
│ ├─ 汇总三审稿人意见
│ ├─ 问题分类(Critical/Major/Minor)
│ ├─ 逐条响应和修改
│ ├─ 更新 Proposal
│ └─ 输出:refine-logs/round-1/refinement.md
│
├─ Round 2 Review:(同 Round 1)
│ └─ 输出:refine-logs/round-2/
│
├─ Round 2 Refinement:
│ └─ 输出:refine-logs/round-2/refinement.md
│
└─ 最终输出:
├─ refine-logs/REVIEW_SUMMARY.md(每轮汇总)
├─ refine-logs/FINAL_PROPOSAL.md(最终方案)
├─ refine-logs/score-history.md(评分历史)
└─ refine-logs/REFINEMENT_REPORT.md(完整报告)
```
### Phase 2.6: 人类反馈验证 ⭐ NEW
```
Step 7.6: 人类反馈循环
│
├─ 呈现 Proposal
│ ├─ 展示 FINAL_PROPOSAL.md 核心内容
│ ├─ 包含:创新点、Figure 设计、实验方案、关键修改
│ └─ 格式:结构化摘要 + 关键决策点
│
├─ 等待人类反馈
│ ├─ 选项 A: 同意 → 继续 Phase 3
│ └─ 选项 B: 有意见 → 收集反馈内容
│
├─ 反馈处理
│ ├─ 如果同意 → 记录并进入 Phase 3
│ └─ 如果不同意 →
│ ├─ 记录反馈意见到 refine-logs/human-feedback/
│ ├─ 根据反馈类型决定返回点:
│ │ ├─ Phase 1 级问题:创新性/任务体系需重构
│ │ ├─ Phase 2 级问题:Figure/文案需调整
│ │ └─ Phase 2.5 级问题:细节优化
│ ├─ 执行迭代修改
│ ├─ 重新运行 Phase 2.5 Refine Loop
│ └─ 再次呈现给人类验证
│
└─ 输出:
├─ refine-logs/human-feedback/feedback-round-X.md
└─ refine-logs/HUMAN_APPROVAL.md(最终批准记录)
```
**人类反馈处理流程:**
```
人类反馈 → 问题分类 → 返回点决策
│
├─ Critical 问题(创新性方向错误)
│ └─ 返回 Phase 1 → 重新评估创新点
│
├─ Major 问题(设计/方案需要大改)
│ └─ 返回 Phase 2 → 调整 Figure/文案
│
├─ Minor 问题(细节优化)
│ └─ 返回 Phase 2.5 → Refine Loop
│
└─ 批准
└─ 进入 Phase 3
```
**反馈收集格式:**
```markdown
## 人类反馈 Round X
**反馈时间**: YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM
**反馈内容**: [用户意见]
**问题级别**: Critical / Major / Minor
**返回阶段**: Phase 1 / Phase 2 / Phase 2.5
**修改建议**: [AI 分析后的修改方案]
---
## 修改执行记录
- [ ] 修改项 1
- [ ] 修改项 2
...
```
### Phase 3: 验证与汇报(Steps 8-11)
```
Step 8: 代码修改方案
├─ 克隆原有代码仓库
├─ 分析代码结构
├─ 映射创新点到修改位置
├─ 设计新增文件 + 修改文件
└─ 输出:08_CODE_MODIFICATION_PLAN.md
Step 9: Demo 快速验证
├─ 应用代码修改
├─ 下载 Demo 数据
├─ Subsample + 少 epoch 快速运行
├─ 可行性判断
├─ 如果不可行 → 修改建议
└─ 输出:09_DEMO_VALIDATION.md
Step 10: 详细分析执行(可选)
├─ 调用 OmicsClaw/Bioclaw
├─ 运行完整分析
├─ 生成实际数据
└─ 输出:10_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
Step 11: 生成组会汇报 PPT(⭐ 新增)
├─ 从 FINAL_PROPOSAL.md 提取核心内容
├─ 从 DEMO_VALIDATION.md 提取 Demo 结果
├─ 生成 12-15 页组会汇报 PPT
├─ 格式:Markdown (Marp) / HTML (reveal.js) / PPTX
└─ 输出:11_PPT_PRESENTATION.md
Step 12: 执行总结与汇报摘要(⭐ BioClaw 集成建议)
├─ 汇总本次实际跑过的阶段
├─ 汇总关键输出文件与路径
├─ 标注哪些步骤真正跑通、哪些仅为草案/脚手架
├─ 标注当前 blocker
├─ 给出下一步建议(最多 3 条)
├─ 记录适合集成汇报的结论
└─ 输出:FINAL_EXEC_SUMMARY.md
```
## 输出目录结构
```
manuscript-plan/
├── 01_INNOVATION_ASSESSMENT.md
├── 02_TASK_SYSTEM.md
├── 03_DATASET_CATALOG.md
├── 04_METRIC_SYSTEM.md
├── 05_ANALYSIS_SYSTEM.md
│
├── 06_FIGURE_DESIGNS/
│ ├── FIGURE_1_DESIGN.md
│ ├── FIGURE_2_DESIGN.md
│ ├── FIGURE_3_DESIGN.md
│ ├── FIGURE_4_DESIGN.md
│ ├── FIGURE_5_DESIGN.md
│ └── SUPPLEMENTARY_DESIGN.md
│
├── 07_MANUSCRIPT_TEXT/
│ ├── INTRODUCTION.md
│ ├── RESULTS.md
│ ├── DISCUSSION.md
│ └── METHODS.md
│
├── refine-logs/ # ⭐ 新增
│ ├── round-0-initial-proposal.md
│ │
│ ├── round-1/
│ │ ├── editor-review.md
│ │ ├── computational-review.md
│ │ ├── biological-review.md
│ │ ├── review-summary.md
│ │ └── refinement.md
│ │
│ ├── round-2/
│ │ ├── editor-review.md
│ │ ├── computational-review.md
│ │ ├── biological-review.md
│ │ ├── review-summary.md
│ │ └── refinement.md
│ │
│ ├── human-feedback/ # ⭐ NEW: 人类反馈记录
│ │ ├── feedback-round-1.md
│ │ ├── feedback-round-2.md
│ │ └── ...
│ │
│ ├── REVIEW_SUMMARY.md
│ ├── FINAL_PROPOSAL.md
│ ├── HUMAN_APPROVAL.md # ⭐ NEW: 人类批准记录
│ ├── score-history.md
│ └── REFINEMENT_REPORT.md
│
├── 08_CODE_MODIFICATION_PLAN.md
├── 09_DEMO_VALIDATION.md
├── 10_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md
│
├── 11_PPT_PRESENTATION.md # ⭐ 新增:组会汇报 PPT
├── FINAL_EXEC_SUMMARY.md # ⭐ 新增:面向人类汇报的执行摘要
├── INTEGRATION_TEST_REPORT.md # ⭐ 可选:集成/验证测试报告
│
└── FINAL_MANUSCRIPT_PLAN.md
```
## 执行摘要模板
每次较完整运行结束后,补一个汇报友好的摘要文件,至少覆盖以下内容:
```md
# FINAL_EXEC_SUMMARY
## Run Scope
- Topic:
- Date:
- Workspace:
- Pipeline entry:
## Stages Executed
- Step / Phase:
- Step / Phase:
## Key Files Generated
- path/to/file
- path/to/file
## Verified Outputs
- What actually ran successfully
- What was only drafted / scaffolded
## Current Blockers
- blocker 1
- blocker 2
## Recommended Next Steps
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...
## Attribution
- Workflow family: Bio-Manuscript-Forge
- BioClaw integration: community-contributed workflow
- Contributor reference: Hongyu Dong, Westlake University PhD candidate, BioClaw community contributor
```
## 三审稿人评审标准
### Editor(编辑)
- **职责**:初审,判断是否达到 Nature 子刊水平
- **评审维度**:创新性、可行性、期刊匹配度
- **评分**:创新性/10、可行性/10、推荐意见
### 计算审稿人
- **职责**:从计算/算法角度评审
- **评审维度**:算法设计、方法创新、实验严谨性、代码可行性
- **评分**:方法创新/10、技术严谨/10、代码可行/10
### 生物分析审稿人
- **职责**:从生物学/分析角度评审
- **评审维度**:生物学意义、分析设计、数据选择
- **评分**:生物意义/10、分析设计/10、数据选择/10
## 使用方式
```bash
/bio-manuscript-pipeline "topic: spatial multi-omics integration | base_work: https://github.com/example/project | innovation: boundary-aware cross-modal alignment | demo_data: https://example.com/data.h5ad | target_journal: nat-communications | num_refine_rounds: 2"
```
## 子 Skill 调用
本 Pipeline 会依次调用以下子 Skill:
- `bio-innovation-check`(Step 1)
- `bio-task-system`(Step 2)
- `bio-dataset-search`(Step 3)
- `bio-metric-system`(Step 4)
- `bio-analysis-system`(Step 5)
- `bio-figure-design`(Step 6)
- `bio-manuscript-text`(Step 7)
- `bio-manuscript-refine`(Step 7.5)⭐
- `bio-human-feedback`(Step 7.6)⭐ NEW - 人类反馈验证
- `bio-code-modification`(Step 8)
- `bio-demo-validate`(Step 9)
- `bio-ppt-generate`(Step 11)⭐
## 注意事项
1. **Phase 1 完成后**:检查创新性评估结果
2. **Phase 2 完成后**:检查 Figure 设计和文案
3. **Phase 2.5(Refine Loop)**:每轮评分需达到 7+ 才能进入下一阶段
4. **Phase 2.6(人类反馈验证)**:⭐ 关键检查点
- 呈现 FINAL_PROPOSAL.md 给人类审阅
- 必须等待人类明确反馈
- 同意 → 继续 Phase 3
- 不同意 → 根据问题级别返回对应阶段迭代
- 所有反馈记录到 refine-logs/human-feedback/
5. **Phase 3**:Demo 验证如果不可行,回到 Step 8 重新设计
6. **迭代收敛**:通常 2 轮 Refine 后评分趋于稳定
7. **最终检查**:使用 FINAL_PROPOSAL.md 作为执行依据
8. **人类批准**:必须有人类批准记录(HUMAN_APPROVAL.md)才能进入 Phase 3
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!