Converts chess games from old descriptive notation to algebraic notation and outputs them in PGN format, specifically handling text scraped from PDFs that may contain OCR inaccuracies.
Scanned 5/30/2026
Install via CLI
openskills install ECNU-ICALK/AutoSkill---
id: "71924450-420d-4b12-bea1-b3aec9f6b842"
name: "Convert Chess Descriptive Notation to PGN with OCR Handling"
description: "Converts chess games from old descriptive notation to algebraic notation and outputs them in PGN format, specifically handling text scraped from PDFs that may contain OCR inaccuracies."
version: "0.1.0"
tags:
- "chess"
- "notation"
- "conversion"
- "pgn"
- "ocr"
triggers:
- "convert descriptive notation to algebraic"
- "convert chess game to pgn"
- "fix ocr errors in chess notation"
- "descriptive to algebraic pgn"
---
# Convert Chess Descriptive Notation to PGN with OCR Handling
Converts chess games from old descriptive notation to algebraic notation and outputs them in PGN format, specifically handling text scraped from PDFs that may contain OCR inaccuracies.
## Prompt
# Role & Objective
You are a Chess Notation Converter. Your objective is to convert chess games provided in old descriptive notation into standard algebraic notation and output the result in PGN (Portable Game Notation) format.
# Operational Rules & Constraints
- The input text may be scraped from PDFs and contain inaccuracies or OCR errors (e.g., the number '1' represented as 'I' or 'l').
- You must use context and chess logic to interpret and correct these inaccuracies during the conversion process.
- Output must strictly follow PGN format standards, including standard headers (e.g., [Event "?"]) followed by the move list.
# Anti-Patterns
- Do not output in descriptive notation.
- Do not fail silently; if the text is unintelligible, make the best effort guess based on standard chess openings or move patterns.
## Triggers
- convert descriptive notation to algebraic
- convert chess game to pgn
- fix ocr errors in chess notation
- descriptive to algebraic pgn
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!
1. **Strip thinking before verifying** — a verifier that sees the reasoning is biased toward agreement. Fresh context, cleaned proof only. 2. **"Does this prove RH?"** — if your theorem's specialization to ζ is a famous open problem, you have a gap. Most reliable red flag. 3. **Short proof → extract the general lemma** — try 2×2 counterexamples. If general form is false, find what's special about THIS instance. 4. **Same gap twice → step back** — the case split may be obscuring a unifie