Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add raja21068/AutoResearch --skill proof-writergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/raja21068/AutoResearchWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/raja21068/autoresearch/proof-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/raja21068/autoresearch/proof-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/raja21068/autoresearch/proof-writer/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/raja21068/autoresearch/proof-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/raja21068/autoresearch/proof-writer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00073 | $0.01647 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00823 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00329 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00165 |
Grade A, and why
proof-writer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 8d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
100% identical to proof-writer — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 224 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Proof Write: Rigorous Theorem / Lemma Drafting
Write a mathematically honest proof package, not a polished fake proof.
Constants
- DEFAULT_PROOF_DOC =
PROOF_PACKAGE.mdin project root - STATUS =
PROVABLE AS STATED | PROVABLE AFTER WEAKENING / EXTRA ASSUMPTION | NOT CURRENTLY JUSTIFIED
Context: $ARGUMENTS
Goal
Produce exactly one of:
- a complete proof of the original claim
- a corrected claim plus a proof of the corrected claim
- a blockage report explaining why the claim is not currently justified
Inputs
Extract and normalize:
- exact theorem / lemma / proposition / corollary statement
- explicit assumptions
- notation and definitions
- any user-provided proof sketch, partial proof, or intended strategy
- nearby lemmas or claims in local notes, appendix files, or theorem drafts if the request points to them
- desired output style if specified: concise, appendix-ready, or full-detail
If notation or assumptions are ambiguous, state the exact interpretation you are using before proving anything.
Workflow
Step 1: Gather Proof Context
Determine the target proof file with this priority:
- a file path explicitly specified by the user
- a proof draft already referenced in local notes or theorem files
PROOF_PACKAGE.mdin project root as the default target
Read the relevant local context:
- the chosen target proof file, if it already exists
- theorem notes, appendix drafts, or files explicitly mentioned by the user
Extract:
- exact claim
- assumptions
- notation
- proof sketch or partial proof
- nearby lemmas that the draft may depend on
Step 2: Normalize the Claim
Restate:
- the exact claim being proved
- all assumptions, separately from conclusions
- all symbols used in the claim
Identify:
- hidden assumptions
- undefined notation
- scope ambiguities
- whether the available sketch proves the full claim or only a weaker variant
Preserve the user's original theorem statement unless a change is explicitly required. If you use a stronger normalization or cleaner internal formulation only to make the proof easier, keep that as an internal proof device rather than silently replacing the original claim.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 8d ago First seen · 224 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A 6d7b3094711f
proof-writer is a skill published in the GitHub repository raja21068/AutoResearch (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 1,647 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to proof-writer, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
content-refinement-agent
Step 5 of the PaperOrchestra pipeline (arXiv:2604.05018). Iteratively refine drafts/paper.tex by simulating peer review and applying targeted revisions, with strict accept/revert halt rules, deterministic 0-100 decision bands (Accept/Minor/Major/Reject) that drive a target-met early stop, and a Devil's Advocate…
section-writing-agent
Step 4 of the PaperOrchestra pipeline (arXiv:2604.05018). ONE single multimodal LLM call that drafts the remaining paper sections (Abstract, Methodology, Experiments, Conclusion), extracts numeric values from experimentallog.md into LaTeX booktabs tables, splices the generated figures from Step 2, and merges…
plotting-agent
Step 2 of the PaperOrchestra pipeline (arXiv:2604.05018). Execute the visualization plan from outline.json — render plots and conceptual diagrams from experimentallog.md and idea.md, optionally refine via VLM critique loop, and produce context-aware captions. Runs in parallel with the literature-review-agent. TRIGGER…
outline-agent
Step 1 of the PaperOrchestra pipeline (arXiv:2604.05018). Convert (idea.md, experimentallog.md, template.tex, conferenceguidelines.md) into a strict JSON outline containing a plotting plan, literature search plan (Intro + Related Work), and section-level writing plan with citation hints. TRIGGER when the orchestrator…
paper-autoraters
Run the four paper-quality autoraters from PaperOrchestra (arXiv:2604.05018, App. F.3) — Citation F1 (P0/P1 partition + Precision/Recall/F1), Literature Review Quality (6-axis 0-100 with anti-inflation rules), SxS Overall Paper Quality (side-by-side), and SxS Literature Review Quality (side-by-side). TRIGGER when the…
paper-writing-bench
Reverse-engineer raw materials (Sparse idea, Dense idea, experimental log) from an existing AI research paper to build a benchmark case for evaluating paper-writing pipelines. Replicates the PaperWritingBench dataset construction procedure from arXiv:2604.05018 §3 / App. C. TRIGGER when the user asks to "build a…