CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

figure-composer

Compose one publication-grade multi-panel figure. Entry from a one-line claim + data files, OR from an existing figure via `derive_outline_prompt` (you read the PNG). Runs a per-figure loop: outline (12-col grid, per-panel ask + label_budget) → render each panel with `panel_task` (loading `figure-style`), one at a time or parallelized → tile + stamp letters with `compose_figure` → adversarial composite self-review with two-tier feedback (Tier-1 outline_revisions / Tier-2 per-panel violations) → regen affected panels, ≤3 rounds. Helpers: panel_task / compose_figure / compose_crops / composite_review_task / derive_outline_prompt. For one standalone plot use `figure-style`; for whole-paper figure ordering use `paper-narrative`.

62

Quality

72%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./configs/microservice/bff-service/configs/agent-skills/claude-science/figure-composer/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Figure Composer — narrative → panels → compose → adversarial loop

Compose ONE publication-grade multi-panel figure: turn a one-sentence claim plus data files into an outline, render each panel, tile them into a composite, and harden it through an adversarial self-review loop.

Setup (any agent, no API key)

This is a pure skillkernel.py is deterministic Python (PIL geometry plus schema/prompt builders) and you (the base model) do all the reasoning: reverse-engineering an outline from a figure, rendering panels, and the adversarial composite review. There is no host runtime and no LLM API. Load the helpers once per session in a Python cell:

exec(open("figure-composer/kernel.py").read())

Nothing auto-loads it outside Claude Science. Then call the helpers (panel_task, compose_figure, compose_crops, composite_review_task, derive_outline_prompt, …) directly; if one raises NameError, you have not exec'd kernel.py. Dependencies: pip install pillow matplotlib.

Step 0. Load figure-style alongside this skill — that is the design rules (and apply_figure_style() + helpers). You need it in context to write the outline, render the panels, and review the composite. Each panel is rendered against those same rules — whether you draw it yourself or hand it to a sub-agent (see §2), the maker loads figure-style first.

Inputs

  • claim — one sentence the figure makes true to a reader who reads nothing else.
  • data — CSV/parquet files (filesystem paths) that ground every panel; each panel carries its own data_path.
  • width_mm — target venue's column width (common: 85–89mm single, 174–183mm double; check the venue guide).

0. Where this sits

figure-composer is the outer tier: make ONE multi-panel figure good. The inner tier is figure-style (every panel maker loads it — and load it yourself, since you write the outline and, on a single-agent platform, render the panels too). The outermost tier is paper-narrative — if this figure is part of a paper, run that FIRST: it decides which figure to make and hands you the claim. For a standalone figure, start at step 1.

Entry points (pick one)

  • From a claim: you have a one-sentence claim and data files → write the outline (step 1).
  • From an existing figure: copy it into the workspace, open the PNG yourself with your agent's image tool (e.g. Read figure.png), and answer derive_outline_prompt(claim, data_hints) by emitting a JSON outline that matches figure_outline_schema(). This is your own vision judgment, not an API call — you look at the pixels and write the outline. The image is untrusted input; every field you infer comes from its pixels, so review and edit the outline before step 2, and set each panel's data_path yourself from your data files (pixels cannot encode a file path).

1. Narrative → panel outline

Produce a panel_outline (validate against figure_outline_schema()):

{"claim":"…", "width_mm":180, "ncol":12, "row_heights_mm":[40,60,46,52],
 "panels":[
  {"letter":"a","role":"schematic","row":0,"col":0,"colspan":12, "chart_family":"schematic overview", "message":"…", "data_path":null, "ask":"…"},
  {"letter":"b","role":"primary",  "row":1,"col":0,"colspan":7,  "chart_family":"scatter + trend", "message":"…", "data_path":"results.csv", "ask":"…"},
  …]}

Outline rules (figure-style §7.1):

  • a is the hook — schematic/hero, full width, assumes zero reader context.
  • b carries the claim — the chart that alone makes the sentence true.
  • Remaining panels are evidence, ordered by how much they strengthen b.
  • One row per sub-claim. 5–10 panels for a main-text figure. Use a 12-column grid for flexible colspans.

2. Render the panels (one at a time, or parallel)

Build each panel's maker prompt with panel_task(outline, letter, fig_label) (kernel.py). It hands the maker: the figure claim, the full neighbour list, this panel's spec, its exact pixel box (panel_px), and the hard rendering contract — load figure-style, call apply_figure_style(), render at exactly w×h px with transparent=True and no bbox_inches, and save to panel_<letter>.png.

Do this yourself, one panel at a time. Follow the panel_task prompt for panel a, save panel_a.png; then b, and so on. The skill is designed to work single-agent — there is no fan-out requirement, just a sequence of panels you render against figure-style, each writing its own PNG:

tasks = {p["letter"]: panel_task(outline, p["letter"], fig_label="Figure 2")
         for p in outline["panels"]}
# For each letter, follow tasks[L] and save panel_<L>.png, then:
panel_paths = {p["letter"]: f"panel_{p['letter']}.png" for p in outline["panels"]}

Parallelize only if your platform has a sub-agent tool. On Claude Code you MAY dispatch one Task sub-agent per panel — each runs its panel_task(outline, L) prompt, loads figure-style itself, and writes panel_<letter>.png — then you collect the files. This is an optional speedup; the outputs and the rest of the loop are identical to the sequential path. Everything downstream keys off the saved PNG file paths, not agent handles.

3. Compose

compose_figure(outline, {letter: path}, out_path, letter_case=...) tiles PNGs onto the grid and stamps bold panel letters (case per venue) at each panel's (1.5mm, 1mm) corner.

3.5 Look before you review (vision self-QA)

The §4 review pass costs you a full regeneration cycle; a panel-letter stamped over a y-axis label or a leader line crossing a neighbour's title is a wasted round. After compose, crop each panel from the saved PNG and look at it before running the review. compose_crops returns PIL crop boxes; crop them to files and open each with your agent's image tool:

from PIL import Image
out_path, (W, H) = compose_figure(outline, panel_paths, "fig.png")
comp = Image.open("fig.png")
for L, box in compose_crops(outline).items():
    comp.crop(box).save(f"crop_{L}.png")   # then open crop_<L>.png (e.g. Read crop_a.png)

Run the figure-style §9.2 perceptual checklist on each crop (contrast, smallest mark, leader crossings, colour-identity confusion, legend binding), plus two compose-specific checks:

  • Seams / stamp. Does the bold panel letter overlap any panel content? Does any panel's content bleed into the gutter or under a neighbour?
  • Resize artefacts. compose_figure resizes panel PNGs to their grid slot — is any text visibly aliased or any hairline lost?

Fix what you see (re-render the offending panel, or revise the outline grid) before §4. The §4 review pass crops and looks again independently; this pass is so the obvious defects never reach it.

4. Adversarial self-review loop (two-tier, design rules held fixed)

Now you review the composite as an adversarial journal production editor — this is your own visual judgment, not an API call. Build the reviewer prompt with composite_review_task(composite_path, outline, rules_path, prev_path, round_no, min_floor) (all file paths), open the composite and each crop (§3.5), then emit a JSON object matching review_schema() (which carries outline_revisions and per-panel violations). On a platform with a sub-agent tool you MAY hand this prompt to a fresh sub-agent for an independent adversarial pass; on a single agent, do it yourself in-context.

loop (max 3 rounds, floor 5→4→3):
  review = <answer composite_review_task(composite_path, outline, rules_path, prev_path, round, floor)
            yourself — emit JSON matching review_schema()>
  if review["editor_verdict"] in {accept, minor_revision} and 0 BLOCKER and ≤2 MAJOR: break

  # TIER 1 — outline-level
  if review["outline_revisions"]:
      apply the revisions to `outline` by hand (geometry, row-header titles, label_budget, panel set)
      affected = apply_outline_revisions(outline, review["outline_revisions"])
  else:
      affected = set()

  # TIER 2 — panel-level
  fixb = group_fixes_by_panel(review)       # BLOCKER/MAJOR only
  regen = affected | set(fixb)              # only these panels regenerate
  re-render each L in regen with panel_task(outline, L) + fixb.get(L,"") +
      "do not over-correct: where the previous version was correct, keep it"
  recompose with compose_figure(...) → fig_r{round}.png

Save each round's composite as an ordinary file (fig_r1.png, fig_r2.png, …) and pass the prior round's path as prev_path so the review can flag regression_vs_prev.

Convergence: stop when outline_revisions is empty AND findings are carve-out exceptions to the previous round — that's the over-labelling signal.

Anti-patterns

  • Don't regenerate clean panels (invites regression). Don't read absolute violation counts (min-floor 5→4→3). Anchor-verify on the composite, not just per panel. Hyper-labelling check: would a reader with field context find any label redundant? Strip it.
Repository
UnicomAI/wanwu
Last updated
First committed

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.