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 write-talk-scriptgit 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/write-talk-script)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/shaishavmaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills/write-talk-script"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shaishavmaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills/write-talk-script/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/write-talk-script"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/shaishavmaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills/write-talk-script.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 | $0.00211 | $0.01762 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00084 | $0.00705 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00042 | $0.00352 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00176 |
Grade B, and why
write-talk-script scanned grade B with 1 finding 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.
Subtle steeringmediumPrompt injection
Instructions that bias recommendations or shape behaviour without the user noticing.
- Timing is an estimate, not a guarantee: never tell the user the talk How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 135 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Write Talk Script
Produce a speaker script that fits an exact talk slot: every slide gets a
word budget at the speaker's real pace, a cumulative timing mark, a
written-out transition, and a marked cut list so running long on stage has a
pre-planned answer. Slides tell the audience what to look at; this script is
what the speaker actually says. It is the post-acceptance companion to
make-slides.
When to use
- "Write the script for my 12-minute SIGSPATIAL talk" / "15-minute slot including 3 minutes of Q&A — what do I say?"
- "Turn my deck into speaker notes I can rehearse from"
- "My talk is running long — what do I cut?"
- "I have a 5-minute lightning talk / spotlight"
- After
make-slides, before the first timed rehearsal.
Inputs
- The exact slot: total minutes, and whether Q&A is inside the slot or handled separately. Ground truth is the presenter instructions and the acceptance email, not memory and not venue profiles.
- The deck or an outline (slide titles in order). No deck yet? Run
make-slidesfirst. - The paper (camera-ready preferred) — the only legitimate source for every number and claim spoken.
- Optional:
venues/conferences/<venue>-<year>.ymlfor venue context, and the speaker's measured pace in words per minute.
Process
-
Pin down the slot facts. Ask for: total minutes, Q&A inside or outside, session language, and whether the chair uses timecards. If a venue profile exists, use it for context only and re-verify against the live
cfp_url/ venue website — profiles do not encode talk slots, and slots change year to year. Typical shapes (verify, never assume): full papers 12–20 min including Q&A; CHI historically ~10 min + 5 Q&A; lightning/spotlight 1–7 min. Details in references/timing-and-cuts.md. -
Calibrate the pace. Default to 130 wpm — a deliberate conference pace. If the speaker can do the 1-minute read-aloud calibration (timing-and-cuts.md §2), use their measured number; suggest 110–120 wpm for non-native speakers or dense technical material. Never exceed 150.
What ships with it
4 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 · 135 lines · 211 tokens per session scan B 1fbce6ccea2c
write-talk-script 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 211 tokens to every session and 1,762 once invoked, about $0.0008 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (subtle steering). 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.