figure-planner
$
npx mdskill add Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills/figure-plannerDefine one claim per figure to streamline manuscript logic.
- Resolves overloaded figures and fragmented panel structures.
- Aligns legends, panel letters, and Results text coherently.
- Decides content placement between main figures and supplements.
- Delivers clear restructuring plans for each figure panel.
SKILL.md
.github/skills/figure-plannerView on GitHub ↗
--- name: figure-planner description: Use when designing, restructuring, or auditing manuscript figures and you need to define one main claim per figure, assign panel roles, align legends with the text, or decide what belongs in main figures versus supplement. --- # Figure Planner ## Overview Use this skill when the bottleneck is no longer sentence writing but figure logic. The goal is to make each figure carry a defensible scientific job, keep the panel set coherent, and ensure that the legend and Results text tell the same story. This skill is narrower than `manuscript-optimizer`. Use `manuscript-optimizer` when the whole paper structure is unstable. Use `figure-planner` when the central issue is what each figure should prove and how each panel should function. ## When To Use Use this skill when: - a figure feels overloaded, fragmented, or hard to summarize - the paper has too many Results subsections driven by panel count - it is unclear what belongs in the main figure versus the supplement - legends, panel letters, and Results text may have drifted apart - you need to redesign figure titles or panel grouping around claims rather than around plotting convenience Do not use this skill for: - low-level visual styling only - final proofreading without figure changes - manuscript-wide claim restructuring that exceeds the figures themselves ## Core Rule Each main figure should earn its place by carrying one dominant claim. If a figure cannot be summarized by one clean sentence, either: - split it, - demote part of it to the supplement, - or rewrite the figure around a clearer claim. ## Panel Roles Assign each panel one primary role before writing the legend or Results paragraph: - claim-supporting evidence - methodological bridge or definition - validation under a new regime - ranking or benchmark comparison - translational or practical consequence - case illustration - failure mode or limitation Do not let one panel pretend to do three jobs at once. ## Planning Order 1. Write the single-sentence claim of the figure. 2. List the minimum panels needed to support that claim. 3. Assign each panel one role. 4. Decide which panel is the anchor panel: - the panel the Results paragraph should revolve around 5. Move secondary detail to: - another figure - the supplement - the legend 6. Rewrite the figure title and legend to match the actual claim. 7. Check that the Results subsection matches the same panel logic. ## Main Figure Versus Supplement Keep in the main figure: - the panels required to establish the core claim - the key comparison readers must see immediately - the panel that defines a new metric, decomposition, or evaluation regime when that definition is part of the argument Move to the supplement: - robustness variants - denser method-by-method comparisons - extended cases - secondary ablations - additional examples that support but do not define the main claim ## Legend Rules Legends should do more than decode axes. Each legend should: - define the role of each panel - preserve the key quantitative anchors omitted from the compressed main text - stay consistent with panel letters, metrics, datasets, and baselines - avoid interpretation that is stronger than the plotted evidence ## Visual Hygiene Pass After the figure logic is stable, run one visual-hygiene pass: - keep figure-internal fonts consistent and close to the manuscript's reading scale - prefer vector graphics for plots, diagrams, and schematic panels when possible - use a restrained palette; keep the same category in the same color family - avoid accidental salience from one panel or module being much darker or brighter unless that emphasis is deliberate - trim dead margins and unnecessary whitespace around panels - reduce text load inside the figure; let shapes, alignment, and grouping do more of the explanatory work - keep arrow direction and symbol conventions consistent when the figure is showing flow or process - borrow proven table or panel arrangements as layout references when useful, but do not inherit conference-template clutter by default ## Common Failure Modes - one figure trying to carry multiple unrelated claims - panel order following plotting chronology instead of argument logic - methodological bridge panels described as generic motivation - Results text claiming something the legend or panel does not support - supplementary figures cited too vaguely when one panel is doing the real work - keeping weak auxiliary metrics at headline level instead of demoting them - inconsistent figure typography, whitespace, or color logic making the scientific comparison harder to read ## Nature-Style Enhancements ### Matplotlib Figure Standards For figures targeting Nature or similar high-impact journals, apply the following `rcParams`: ```python import matplotlib.pyplot as plt plt.rcParams['font.family'] = 'sans-serif' plt.rcParams['font.sans-serif'] = ['Arial'] plt.rcParams['svg.fonttype'] = 'none' # editable text in SVG/PDF plt.rcParams['font.size'] = 16 # 24 for large bar panels plt.rcParams['axes.spines.right'] = False plt.rcParams['axes.spines.top'] = False plt.rcParams['axes.linewidth'] = 2.5 # 3 for big bars, 2 for compact plt.rcParams['legend.frameon'] = False ``` Use `text.usetex = True` only when LaTeX is installed and math-rich labels are required. ### When to Use - Figures for **papers, slides, or reports** targeting Nature, NeurIPS, ICLR, or similar venues. - Requests involving **grouped bars, trend lines, heatmaps, radar plots, multi-panel grids**, or **PDF/SVG/high-DPI** output. - Any mention of "Nature style", "publication figure", "paper figure", or "high-quality scientific plot". ## Output Standard When using this skill, produce: - the figure's one-sentence claim - the proposed panel list with roles - what stays in the main figure versus what moves to supplement - the legend logic - the visual-hygiene notes that still need attention - the matching Results subsection title or topic sentence
More from Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills
- academic-presentations>-
- academic-researcherUse when conducting literature reviews, summarizing papers, comparing methodologies, identifying research gaps, or supporting scholarly writing across disciplines.
- citation-verifierUse when checking manuscript citations, bibliography hygiene, DOI or PMID completeness, placeholder references, or BibTeX consistency before submission or revision.
- conference-paper-writingUse when writing or revising ML or AI conference papers for venues such as NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, ACL, AAAI, or COLM, especially when the workflow is conference-first rather than Nature-style journal-first.
- data-availabilityUse when drafting, auditing, or revising Data Availability statements, repository plans, accession-number placement, source-data coverage, or restricted-data wording for journal submission or resubmission.
- manuscript-optimizerUse when reviewing or revising an academic manuscript whose central claim, evidence chain, figures, terminology, and prose may have drifted out of sync before submission or resubmission.
- nature-portfolio-playbookUse when choosing among Nature, Nature Methods, or Nature Biotechnology, or when preparing a Nature Portfolio life-science manuscript for venue fit, article-type framing, and policy-aware pre-submission checks.
- paper-analyzerUse when deeply analyzing a single paper and producing structured notes on claims, methods, figures, evaluation, strengths, limitations, and related work.
- paper-bootstrapUse when starting a new manuscript project or cleaning up an existing paper directory and you need a standard structure, active source files, project memory, and venue defaults before deeper writing begins.
- paper-reviewerUse when acting as a journal or grant reviewer and writing formal reviewer-side evaluations focused on methodology, statistics, reporting standards, reproducibility, and constructive feedback.