todofig

name

todofig

description

Compare a captured-figure deck against an outline document and produce a prioritized TODO of gaps (P0/P1/P2). Reads `## Research stack` config from the user's CLAUDE.md (Deck file / Outline file / Figure count / Result pattern / Report language / Report output dir). Accepts an optional figure identifier in `$ARGUMENTS` (e.g. "Fig4") to restrict the analysis to a single figure. Called by the `/todofig` slash command but also standalone-invocable.

Figure ↔ Outline Gap Analysis

Goal: compare what an exported figure deck currently contains against what an outline document prescribes, and produce a prioritized, actionable TODO so the user knows exactly what to fix.

When this skill is invoked, immediately execute the workflow below. Do not only restate or summarize these instructions back to the user.

This skill is status + gaps + prioritized actions. For a status-only snapshot (no TODO), use the sync skill (called by /sync).

---

Step 0 — Resolve project configuration

Read the project's CLAUDE.md for a ## Research stack section. Required fields:

Field	Purpose	Example
Deck file	Path to the .key / .pptx deck (drives figure refresh via cropfig)	decks/main.key
Outline file	Canonical outline (markdown)	outline.md
Figure count	Total figures expected	8
Result pattern	Regex to find result/figure blocks	^### Result (\d+)
Report language	Output language	English
Report output dir	Where to save the TODO report	./todofig_reports/

Optional field:

Field	Default	Purpose
Figure PNG dir	<dirname(Deck file)>/png/	Where the cropped per-slide PNGs live. This skill reads these to inspect figure state. Populated by the cropfig skill.

If any required field is missing, ask the user once for the missing values, then offer to write them into the project's CLAUDE.md as a ## Research stack section. See wiki/Configuration.md for the canonical block format.

Figure refresh is owned by the cropfig skill, not this skill. Run cropfig separately if the PNG dir is stale or empty.

---

Step 1 — Load the outline

Read Outline file in full. For every block matching Result pattern, extract:

• The intended figure number / identifier (capture group from the regex)
• The panel list (sub-bullets, A/B/C/D/...)
• The key message sentence — what the figure must visually communicate
• Methods / conditions / controls / hyperparameters specific to this figure

Step 1.5 — Pull supervisor's unresolved CRITICAL issues (optional)

If .claude/agent-memory/supervisor/MEMORY.md exists, read it for unresolved CRITICAL issues. Each unresolved CRITICAL issue that blocks a figure or a main-text claim auto-injects as a P0 item in Step 5, even if the figure looks superficially complete.

---

Step 2 — Inspect each cropped figure PNG

List Figure PNG dir/figure*.png in filename order. Each figureNN.png corresponds 1-to-1 with the figure block numbered N in the outline (no slide-to-figure offset — cropfig writes figure-numbered filenames directly).

If Figure PNG dir is empty, cropfig has not been run yet — say so in the report and skip the inspection rather than fabricating panel contents.

For every figure, note:

• Which panels are drawn vs. missing
• Whether axes / legends / typography are submission-ready (legible at print width)
• Whether the figure's key message reads off the panels without the caption
• Whether all required conditions / controls / contrasts are present
• Cross-figure consistency: palette, condition naming, axis conventions

Visual-language checklist (when applicable)

If .claude/agent-memory/figure-descriptor/color-system.md exists, load it and check every figure against:

• Palette conformance — do condition colors match the locked hex codes? Flag any inline-invented color.
• Plot-type conformance — does the outline-prescribed plot type match what's shown?
• Typography — axis labels, panel labels, tick labels at the venue's print-size thresholds
• Visual hierarchy — is the figure's primary contrast the most prominent element?
• Overclaim check — if supervisor/MEMORY.md flags any contrast as non-significant, ensure no figure asserts it visually as significant

Budget note: reading every PNG is token-heavy. If Figure count > 12 and $ARGUMENTS is non-empty, inspect only the focused figure + immediate neighbors; defer the rest unless the gap analysis demands them.

---

Step 3 — Build the diff

For each figure, build the diff: outline-prescribed contents vs. cropped PNG contents.

Categories to check:

1. Missing panels — outline calls for panel X, slide does not show it.
2. Placeholder content — panel is present but shows preliminary data, wrong subject/condition, stale version.
3. Orphan figures — a figureNN.png exists that the outline does not describe.
4. Cross-figure consistency — palette, label conventions, identifier choices match across all figures.
5. Replication / supplementary completeness — if the outline calls for replication or supplementary panels, are they present? (Often incomplete; flag explicitly.)
6. Key-message visibility — if the outline states a specific quantitative claim ("X reduces Y by 40%"), does the figure actually communicate that number?
7. Staleness — if Outline file mtime is newer than the deck file mtime (or the latest Figure PNG dir PNG mtime), the outline has probably drifted ahead of the figures. Flag which figures look stale.

---

Step 4 — Produce the TODO

Deliver the result in Report language using the structure below. Keep figure / panel / condition identifiers in English regardless of Report language.

# Figure-Outline Gap Report — YYYY-MM-DD

## Figure-by-figure

### Fig 1 — [title from outline]
- ✅ ...
- ⚠️ ...
- ❌ ...
- **Next action:** ...

### Fig 2 — [title]
- ✅ ...
- ⚠️ ...
- ❌ ...
- **Next action:** ...

... (through Fig <figure_count>)

## Cross-cutting

- **Missing figures/panels:** ...
- **Orphan slides:** ...
- **Stale (outline newer than deck):** ...
- **Consistency issues:** ...

## Prioritized TODO (this iteration)

1. [P0] ...
2. [P0] ...
3. [P1] ...
4. [P2] ...

## Prioritized TODO (later, before submission)

- ...

Priority rules:

• P0 — blocks a main-text claim, or is an unresolved CRITICAL issue carried from supervisor/MEMORY.md (Step 1.5).
• P1 — figure exists but does not clearly convey the outline's key message.
• P2 — cosmetic / consistency issues (palette, labels, ID matching, color-system violations).
• Later — supplementary / replication panels not load-bearing for the core narrative.

Narrative-half balance check (when applicable): after ranking, if the outline structures the project into multiple narrative threads (e.g., two halves of a paper title), check whether P0/P1 items cluster in one thread. If so, flag at the top that the other thread is under-resourced.

---

Step 5 — Persist the report

Save the full report to ${Report output dir}/todofig_YYYY-MM-DD.md. Create the directory if it doesn't exist (mkdir -p). Do not overwrite any human-maintained TODO file (e.g., a project-level TODO.md).

---

Argument parsing

Inspect $ARGUMENTS (passed through by commands/todofig.md).

If $ARGUMENTS matches a figure identifier (e.g., Fig4, R1, Figure 5, 5), restrict the analysis to that single figure. Skip the cross-cutting and multi-figure sections; produce only the focused figure's ✅ / ⚠️ / ❌ block and a focused TODO.

If $ARGUMENTS is empty, run the full sweep over all Figure count figures.