Skip to main content

codexkit-document-summarizer

Summarize document-heavy inputs such as memos, policies, PDFs, research notes, proposals, and multi-document packets. Use when users need key points, obligations, questions, and action implications from documents.

Quellinformationen

Repository
hoavdc/CodexKit
Letzte Quellaktivität
15. Mai 2026 um 15:10
Erkannte Sprache von SKILL.md
Englisch
Sterne
26
Forks
12

Installationsoptionen

Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.

Quelldateien prüfen

Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.

Datei-Explorer
2 Dateien

SKILL.md wird angezeigt

SKILL.md
Quellanweisungen · Schreibgeschützte Vorschau
name
codexkit-document-summarizer
description
Summarize document-heavy inputs such as memos, policies, PDFs, research notes, proposals, and multi-document packets. Use when users need key points, obligations, questions, and action implications from documents.
version
1.0.0
category
review
# Document Summarizer ## When to Use - Summarizing long documents that are not formal business reports. - Extracting key points from policies, proposals, PDFs, research notes, or document packets. - Preparing a quick readout before deciding whether to read the full document. - Comparing multiple documents for themes, contradictions, or action items. ## Procedure ### Step 1 - Identify Document Type Classify the source: policy, proposal, memo, research, contract-like document, transcript, academic paper, operating document, or mixed packet. ### Step 2 - Extract Core Content Capture: - purpose - main claims or findings - dates, parties, obligations, or deadlines - decisions requested - open questions - risks or caveats ### Step 3 - Separate Summary From Interpretation Keep source-backed summary separate from analysis or recommendation. Mark anything inferred. ### Step 4 - Produce Audience-Specific Output Adapt format for executive, manager, student, legal/compliance reviewer, or team member. ### Step 5 - Add Reading Guidance State which sections deserve human review and why. ## Inputs | Input | Required | Format | |-------|----------|--------| | Document text or excerpt | Yes | Pasted text, extracted notes, OCR | | Document type | Recommended | Proposal, policy, memo, research, etc. | | Audience | Recommended | Executive, manager, student, team | | Desired length | Optional | 5 bullets, one page, detailed brief | | Focus area | Optional | Risks, obligations, actions, decisions | ## Output ```markdown ## Document Summary - [Document Name] ### One-Line Takeaway [Core point] ### Key Points - [Point backed by source] ### Actions / Decisions | Item | Owner | Deadline | Source Note | |------|-------|----------|-------------| ### Risks / Caveats - [Risk] ### Needs Human Review - [Section or issue] ``` ## Quality Criteria - [ ] The summary stays faithful to the document and does not invent missing facts. - [ ] Important dates, obligations, numbers, and decisions are preserved. - [ ] Source-backed summary is separated from interpretation. - [ ] The output states what was not reviewed or could not be verified. - [ ] High-risk documents are flagged for expert review. ## Verification (4C) | Check | Question | |-------|----------| | **Correctness** | Are all summarized claims traceable to the document text? | | **Completeness** | Are key points, actions, deadlines, risks, and review needs captured? | | **Context-fit** | Does the summary match the audience and intended decision? | | **Consequence** | What could be misread if the user relies only on the summary? | ## Edge Cases - **OCR or extraction errors** - Flag low confidence and avoid definitive claims. - **Legal, financial, or compliance content** - Summarize only and recommend expert review before acting. - **Multiple documents conflict** - Show a contradiction table instead of choosing a winner. - **Very long packet** - Summarize by section and list skipped or unread portions. ## Examples > **Prompt:** "Summarize this vendor proposal for an operations manager. Focus on deliverables, pricing assumptions, risks, and questions for the vendor." > **Good pattern:** "The proposal assumes customer data export is available by June 1. This is a dependency, not a confirmed commitment." ## Definition of Done - [ ] The user can decide whether to read the full document. - [ ] Important actions and risks are visible. - [ ] Uncertainty and review needs are explicit. ## Changelog - v1.0.0 - Initial release
Auf GitHub ansehen