Build a Docker Sandbox template image by extending docker/sandbox-templates. Use when writing a Dockerfile for sbx, choosing a base variant, building a family of templates with bake, or publishing and loading one with sbx template.

Writes the full Results section of a biomedical manuscript from a sufficiently clear result structure, figure inventory, or analysis summary while preserving evidence boundaries and result hierarchy.

Write a Docker Sandbox kit — a spec.yaml declaring setup steps, network permissions and credentials. Use when authoring or fixing a kit, choosing between kind mixin and kind sandbox, migrating a spec from schemaVersion 1 to 2, or a kit fails sbx kit validate.

Point an external editor or app — VS Code, Cursor, Claude Desktop, or ChatGPT — at a running Docker Sandbox over SSH via the `<name>.sbx` hostname, so the tool's UI stays on the host while files and processes run inside the sandbox. Use when setting up `sbx setup ssh`, wiring a remote-SSH connection in one of those apps, hitting a stalled or looping connection, or deciding whether Claude Desktop's credential-isolation warning applies to a given setup.

Organizes biomedical figures, analyses, and result blocks into a clear Results section structure with disciplined narrative ordering and evidence-aware presentation.

Checks biomedical manuscripts against reporting guidelines such as CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, and TRIPOD to identify missing or weak reporting elements before submission or revision.

Checks whether manuscript references are accurately matched to claims, appropriately scoped, and not overextended, misquoted, or second-hand cited.

Reorganizes a paper into a storyline suitable for scientific posters. Use when planning the section structure, title hierarchy, figure selection, and live-explanation flow for an academic conference poster. Also triggers on "help me design a poster layout", "what sections should my poster have", "how do I arrange my poster", "poster structure for [conference]", or "which figures should I use for my poster".

Scrum-inspired paper review, revision, and R&R workflow. Handles docx/tex/md/PDF in English or Chinese. Auto-detects manuscript stage, estimates sprint count, runs multi-lens review (Contribution/Rigor/Writing/Editor), generates prioritized revision backlog, exports MD/DOCX/PDF/HTML reports. Use when asked to review a paper, revise based on reviewer comments, handle R&R, respond to peer review, plan paper revision sprints, or when user types /ps or /papersprint.

Turns your protocol and analysis workflow into publication-ready Methods text. Use when writing or revising the Methods section of a biomedical manuscript, ensuring it complies with reporting guidelines (CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, TRIPOD), matches what is in the Results section, and satisfies journal-specific word limits and declarations. Also triggers on "write my methods", "revise my methods section", "how to report my statistics", "what do I need to include in methods for [study type]", or "make my methods CONSORT-compliant".

Improves medical English precision without changing the underlying facts, evidence boundaries, or intended scientific meaning.

Acknowledges limitations in sample, design, measurement, and validation in a professional way that improves credibility without undermining the whole paper. Use when writing the limitations paragraph of a Discussion section, preparing a grant risk assessment, responding to reviewers about study weaknesses, or framing scope boundaries for a paper. Also triggers on "write my limitations", "how should I address the limitation of", "reviewer said my sample is too small", or "help me word this limitation".

Rewrites technical research content into a structured lay summary that cross-disciplinary teams can quickly understand and act on. Use when the user wants to explain research to colleagues outside their specialty — clinicians, wet-lab scientists, bioinformaticians, product managers, or leadership. Trigger on: "lay summary", "explain my research to the team", "non-technical summary", "cross-disciplinary summary", "translate my findings", "align our team on the study", or any request to communicate research goals, findings, or next steps to a mixed or non-specialist audience. Part of the AIPOCH Academic Writing skill hub. Sits midstream: after research content is clarified, before downstream deliverables like slide decks or graphical abstracts.

Converts existing manuscript content into LaTeX format aligned with a target journal, conference, or template while preserving manuscript meaning and structural integrity.

Writes the full Introduction section of a biomedical manuscript based on an approved or sufficiently clear study logic, while preserving evidence boundaries and introduction discipline.

Builds background-gap-objective logic for biomedical manuscript introductions with clear study positioning and disciplined narrative structure.

Converts a biomedical study storyline into a graphical abstract and, when direct image capability is available, generates the graphical abstract directly; otherwise it falls back to prompts, Mermaid flowcharts, or designer-facing briefs.

Writes Specific Aims pages for grant applications. Use when drafting or revising the Specific Aims page (NIH R01/R21/R03), NSF Project Summary, or equivalent for any major funding agency. Also triggers on "write my specific aims", "help me draft specific aims for NIH", "what should a specific aims page include", "NSF project summary", "write my grant aims", or "how do I structure an R01".

Writes complete, publication-grade figure legends that can stand on their own. Use when writing or revising figure legends for any scientific figure — bar charts, line graphs, scatter plots, box plots, heatmaps, survival curves, flow cytometry plots, western blots, microscopy images, or schematic diagrams. Also triggers on "write a figure legend for", "help me describe this figure", "my figure needs a legend", "write Figure 1 legend", or "what should a figure legend include".

Composes a Discussion around key findings, mechanisms, clinical relevance, and limitations. Use when writing or improving a Discussion section for any biomedical manuscript — including interpreting results, connecting to prior literature, addressing unexpected findings, framing limitations, and writing the conclusion. Also triggers on "write my discussion", "help me discuss my findings", "how do I compare to prior studies", "write the limitations paragraph", or "draft a discussion for my paper".