Detalle del Skill
results-report
Writes structured experiment-results reports; narrowly research-specific.
Revisar antes de usar
La revisión automática comprueba relevancia, no seguridad ni respaldo. Lee las instrucciones de la fuente antes de usar este Skill.
SKILL.md
Este extracto es una copia guardada durante la revisión. La fuente externa contiene la versión completa y actual.
---
name: results-report
description: This skill should be used when the user asks to "write an experiment report", "summarize experimental results", "do experiment retrospection", "write a results report", "写实验总结报告", "写实验复盘", or mentions turning completed experiment artifacts into a structured, decision-oriented research report. It assumes strict analysis should come from `results-analysis` first.
version: 0.1.0
tags: [Research, Reporting, Experiments, Obsidian]
---
# Results Report
Write the **complete post-experiment summary report** after analysis artifacts are ready.
This skill is for the stage **after** `results-analysis`.
## Role boundary
### `results-analysis` does
- strict statistics,
- real figures,
- figure interpretation scaffolding,
- stats appendix.
### `results-report` does
- complete experiment wrap-up report,
- decision-oriented narrative,
- figure-by-figure interpretation inside a coherent structure,
- limitations, failure cases, and next actions,
- Obsidian write-back into `Results/Reports/`.
When the task is to create or redesign paper-ready figures/tables themselves, rely on `publication-chart-skill` instead of expanding `results-report` into figure/table production.
Do not replace strict analysis with confident prose. If the analysis bundle is missing, first identify the blocker and request or produce the missing bundle.
Hard gate: do not write a complete report when `analysis-report.md`, `stats-appendix.md`, `figure-catalog.md`, provenance, or the primary comparison question is missing. In that case, write only a blocker summary and route back to `results-analysis`.
## Default output
The default report is an **internal research report**, not manuscript prose.
It should be named as:
```text
YYYY-MM-DD--{experiment-line}--r{round}--{purpose}.md
```
Example:
- `2026-03-18--freezing--r03--transfer-summary.md`
- `2026-03-18--contrastive-adversarial--r02--ablation-report.md`
The note title should be:
```text
{Experiment Line} / Round {N} / {Purpose} / {YYYY-MM-DD}
```
Read `references/report-naming.md` before finalizing the filename or note title.
## Required frontmatter
```yaml
---
type: results-report
date: 2026-03-18
experiment_line: freezing
round: 3
purpose: transfer-summary
status: active
source_artifacts:
- analysis-output/analysis-report.md
- analysis-output/stats-appendix.md
linked_experiments:
- Experiments/Freezing-Study.md
linked_results:
- Results/Freezing-vs-Adapter.md
---
```
## Default report structure
The report must include all sections below.
1. **Executive Summary**
2. **Experiment Identity and Decision Context**
3. **Setup and Evaluation Protocol**
4. **Main Findings**
5. **Statistical Validation**
6. **Figure-by-Figure Interpretation**
7. **Failure Cases / Negative Results / Limitations**
8. **What Changed Our Belief**
9. **Next Actions**
10. **Artifact and Reproducibility Index**
Read `references/report-structure.md` before writing.
## Workflow
### 1. Confirm the report object
Lock these fields first:
- date,
- experiment line,
- round,
- purpose,
- linked experiment note,
- linked durable result note if one already exists.
If round is unknown, do not silently invent a semantic round. Use `r00` only as a temporary placeholder and state that it should be normalized later.
### 2. Read the strict analysis bundle
Minimum required inputs:
- `analysis-report.md`
- `stats-appendix.md`
- `figure-catalog.md`
- actual figures, if available
If these are missing, either generate them first with `results-analysis` or explicitly state which claims cannot be supported.
Do not turn loose CSV/Markdown artifacts into a polished report unless the strict analysis bundle has already validated unit of analysis, primary metric, and claim wording.
### 3. Write the report as a decision object
This report is not a transcript of outputs.
Each section must answer a real question:
- What did we test?
- What changed numerically?
- What is actually supported?
- What failed or rLeer la fuente completa en GitHub (abre una página externa)