NSFC (3) Research Basis Organization Writer

Target Output (Contract)

• Output Destinations (2 files)：

  • extraTex/3.1.Research Basis.tex

    (includes "Response Measures for Research Risks")

  • extraTex/3.2.Working Conditions.tex

• Prohibited Modifications：

  main.tex

  ,

  extraTex/@config.tex

  , any

  .cls/.sty

  files
• Core Objective：Answer three reviewer questions with "evidence chain + condition alignment + risk contingency plan": Have you done similar work? Can you complete this project? How will you handle issues if they arise?

Required Input (Minimum Information Form)

• If not provided by the user, collect/supplement first: references/info_form.md

Workflow (Execute in Order)

1. Locate Project and Target Files：
   • Verify if

     project_root

     exists; if not, report an error and prompt the user to specify the correct path
   • Check if the

     extraTex/

     directory exists; if not, attempt to create it or report an error
   • Confirm

     project_root

     and

     output_mode

     (default is

     apply

     )

     • preview

       mode: Generate only content preview without writing to files (suitable for debugging)

     • apply

       mode: Write generated content to

       extraTex/3.1.Research Basis.tex

       and

       extraTex/3.2.Working Conditions.tex

   • Only edit these two files; prohibited from modifying

     main.tex

     ,

     extraTex/@config.tex

     , any

     .cls/.sty

     files
2. Generate

   3.1 Research Basis

   (Evidence Chain Priority)：
   • Research Accumulation: Focus on the key tasks in

     2.1

     , list "what you have done/what you have mastered/what platforms you already have".
   • Phased Achievements: Only write verifiable content (papers/patents/data/prototypes/preliminary experiment phenomena); use placeholders to request the user to supplement uncertain details.
   • Four Dimensions of Feasibility: Provide 1–3 supporting points for each of theory/technology/team/conditions, and align them one by one with the research content.
3. Explicitly write "Response Measures for Research Risks" in

   3.1

   ：
   • At least 3 risks (at least 1 each for technology/schedule/resources)
   • For each risk: Risk Description → Early Warning Signs (trigger threshold/phenomenon) → Contingency Plan/Alternative Route (including downgraded objectives and deliverables)
4. Generate

   3.2 Working Conditions

   (Conditions Align with Research Content)：
   • Existing Conditions: List item by item, recommended format:
     • Platform: XXX Platform (Available / Accessible)
     • Data: XXX Dataset (Obtained / Publicly Accessible)
     • Samples: XXX Hospital/Institution (Cooperation Agreement Signed / Ethical Review in Progress)
     • Computing Power: XXX Server / GPU (Configured / Shared Use)
     • Team Division of Labor: Member A is responsible for XX, Member B is responsible for YY
     • Compliance Path: Ethical Review (XXX Committee, Cycle X Months)
   • Missing Conditions and Solutions: List item by item, recommended format:
     • Missing Condition: XXX (Impact: YYY)
     • Solution: Procurement / Cooperation / Alternative Data Source / Experiment Downgrade Plan
     • Timeline and Responsible Person: Write it if provided by the user; use a placeholder if not provided
5. Consistency Check：
   • Check 1: Verify if

     3.2 Working Conditions

     can support each key task in

     2.1

     one by one
     • Method: List each key task in

       2.1

       , confirm that corresponding supporting conditions exist in

       3.2

     • Example:
       • Task 1: XXX Experiment → Conditions: XXX Platform, XXX Samples
       • Task 2: YYY Algorithm → Conditions: YYY Computing Power, ZZZ Data
   • Check 2: Verify if risk contingency plans are compatible with the annual plan
     • Method: List each annual milestone in

       2.3

       , confirm that the risk contingency plans have corresponding downgrade solutions
     • Example:
       • Year 1: Sample Acquisition → Risk: Slow Sample Recruitment → Contingency Plan: Alternative Data Source and Downgraded Verification Plan
   • Handling Check Failures:
     • If inconsistencies are found, mark them as

       [Need to Supplement: XXX]

       and prompt the user
     • If the user does not provide

       2.1

       or

       2.3

       , skip the corresponding check and prompt the user

Acceptance Criteria (Definition of Done)

Quality Contract Verification (from config.yaml)

• Research Basis must cover:
  • Research accumulation related to this project (evidence chain)
  • Achieved phased results (verifiable)
  • Feasibility key points (theory/technology/team/conditions)
  • Research risks and response measures (explicitly written)
• Working Conditions must cover:
  • Existing conditions (platform/data/samples/computing power/team/compliance)
  • Missing conditions and solutions (time/budget/cooperation/procurement/alternative plans)

Detailed Checklist

Common Questions and Edge Cases

Q1: What if there is no

extraTex/

directory in the project directory?

extraTex/

mkdir -p projects/NSFC_Young/extraTex

Q2: Can I directly write

3.1 Research Basis

without writing

2.1 Research Content

?

3.2 Working Conditions

2.1

2.1

nsfc-research-content-writer

Q3: What if some content in the information form is inconvenient to disclose?

• ❌ "We published paper XXX in Nature"
• ✅ "We have published relevant papers in Nature (can provide reviewer recommendation letters)"

Q4: Do I have to write 3 risk responses?

Q5: Can a complete research basis be generated if the information form has very little content?

[Please Supplement: XXX]

Change Log

• The change history of this skill is not maintained in this document; it is uniformly recorded in the root-level

  CHANGELOG.md

  .