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 ShaishavMaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills --skill plan-submissiongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ShaishavMaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skillsWrote 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/shaishavmaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills/plan-submission)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/shaishavmaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills/plan-submission"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shaishavmaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills/plan-submission/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/shaishavmaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills/plan-submission"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shaishavmaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills/plan-submission.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 | $0.00155 | $0.01681 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00062 | $0.00672 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.00336 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00168 |
Grade A, and why
plan-submission 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 1mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 136 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Plan Submission
Turn "the deadline is in N weeks" into a dated, phase-aware milestone plan.
Works backwards from the paper deadline (or forwards through rebuttal and
camera-ready if the deadline already passed), anchored to a
venues/conferences/<venue>-<year>.yml profile. Companion skills:
parse-cfp (creates the profile), preflight-check (the T-3d desk-reject
lint), write-rebuttal, prepare-camera-ready.
When to use
- "Plan my SIGSPATIAL submission" / "what do I need to do before the deadline?"
- "How many days until the NeurIPS deadline?" (AoE confusion included)
- "When do I have to register the abstract?" / "when does the rebuttal start?"
- The user just picked a venue (via
select-venue) and asks "what now?"
Inputs
- A venue + year (and ideally a track). The profile must exist at
venues/conferences/<venue>-<year>.yml; if it does not, runparse-cfpfirst — never plan from remembered dates. - Today's date, and any user-specific constraints (vacations, co-author availability, experiments still running).
CONTACT_EMAILenv var if the live re-verification fetch is used.
Process
-
Resolve the venue profile. Locate
venues/conferences/<venue>-<year>.yml. Missing or from a previous cycle → route throughparse-cfpto create/refresh it before planning. Check the profile'sverified:block — ifconfidenceis notverified-liveorverified.dateis old, treat every date as suspect. -
Re-verify the critical dates against the live CFP. Mandatory before the user relies on the plan. Run:
python3 scripts/fetch_page.py "<cfp_url from the profile>"Confirm the abstract deadline, paper deadline, and timezone on the live page (deadlines slip mid-cycle — extensions are common, but so are silent corrections). On mismatch, update the profile first. If the page is JS-rendered or down, say so and mark the plan "dates unverified".
-
Build the timeline. Run:
python3 scripts/build_timeline.py venues/conferences/<venue>-<year>.yml \ --track "<track>" --today YYYY-MM-DD
What ships with it
5 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 136 lines · 155 tokens per session scan A 682ffd423ec9
plan-submission is a skill published in the GitHub repository ShaishavMaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills (55 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 155 tokens to every session and 1,681 once invoked, about $0.0006 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
research-manager
Use this when starting a new research project or managing a complex, multi-step research workflow.
academic-writing
You must use this when producing any research prose — literature reviews, syntheses, analyses, methodology descriptions, discussion sections, abstracts, or any written output intended for an academic audience.
systematic-review
You must use this when conducting PRISMA-standard systematic reviews, protocol development, or Risk of Bias assessment.
hypothesis-testing
You must use this when formulating testable hypotheses, designing experimental controls, or defining falsification criteria.
multi-source-investigation
You must use this when investigating complex claims across diverse sources or fact-checking contradictory information.
peer-review
You must use this when critiquing academic manuscripts, evaluating methodological rigor, or providing structured reviewer feedback.