idea2repo

Strict evidence-based CCF-A readiness review for Idea2Repo. Use when scoring ideas or revised plans, applying cap rules, writing scorecards, or reviewing venue-fit readiness.

Claim-evidence extraction for Idea2Repo research artifacts. Use when building or reviewing claim matrices, evidence rows, paper notes, or downstream scoring inputs that must cite PDF page/quote/chunk ids.

Resource, timeline, compute, data access, and execution feasibility review for Idea2Repo. Use when writing feasibility reports or evaluating whether a CCF-A submission plan is realistic.

Deterministic evidence-first literature search for Idea2Repo. Use when planning, running, reviewing, or debugging research paper searches, adapter results, candidate dedupe/ranking, search reports, or generated repo literature artifacts.

Skeptical novelty and collision analysis for Idea2Repo. Use when comparing an idea against verified related work, writing novelty_gap_matrix.md, or assessing collision risk.

Provenance-first public PDF acquisition for Idea2Repo. Use when downloading, validating, hashing, licensing, or reviewing paper PDF manifests and docs/reference/pdfs artifacts.

PDF parsing, page chunking, and evidence note preparation for Idea2Repo. Use when extracting page text, stable chunk ids, paper notes, or PDF reader prompt inputs.

Evidence-gated related-work synthesis for Idea2Repo. Use when creating or reviewing related_work_matrix.csv, topic clusters, baseline recommendations, or prior-work maps.

Evidence-first research strategy and idea refinement for Idea2Repo. Use after related work, novelty, strict scoring, and feasibility review to produce revised ideas, experiment plans, and paper story artifacts.

Perform a mature-project codebase health audit to find stale legacy code, redundant paths, logic inconsistencies, hardcoded values, code bloat, unnecessary helpers, fallback layers, bridge code, duplicate implementations, likely future bugs, conflicts with future implementation plans, conflicts with internal coding standards, and other maintainability risks. Use when asked to analyze, review, audit, clean up, simplify, de-risk, or find concerning code without immediately implementing fixes.

Distill commit message and contribution conventions from mature open-source projects and adapt them into a practical commit policy for the current repository. Use when asked to create, improve, audit, or enforce commit conventions; compare this repo against OSS commit history; write commit message rules; prepare CONTRIBUTING guidance; or decide whether to use Conventional Commits, prefixes, scopes, issue references, changelog wording, or release-oriented commit hygiene.