# Section Logic Polisher

Logic coherence pass for per-H3 section files: enforce a clear paragraph-1 thesis and...

- Repository: https://github.com/WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills (517 stars)
- Category: Engineering
- License: see repository
- Last updated: 2026-10-05
- Runs scripts: yes, review before use

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills --skill section-logic-polisher -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills --skill section-logic-polisher -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills --skill section-logic-polisher -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills --skill section-logic-polisher -g -a gemini-cli -y`

## Description

Logic coherence pass for per-H3 section files: enforce a clear paragraph-1 thesis and surface paragraph-island risks (connector stats are diagnostic, not a quota) before merging.

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

# Section Logic Polisher (thesis + argument bridges)

## Triggers & routing

- **Trigger**: logic polisher, section logic, thesis statement, connectors, 段落逻辑, 连接词, 论证主线, 润色逻辑.
- **Use when**: `sections/S*.md` exist but read like paragraph islands; you want a targeted, debuggable self-loop before `section-merger`.


Purpose: close the main “paper feel” gap that remains even when a subsection is long and citation-dense:
- missing/weak **thesis** (paragraph 1 never commits to a claim)
- weak **inter-paragraph flow** (paragraph islands; no content-bearing bridges)

This is a **local, per-H3** polish step that happens after drafting and before merging.

Note: if the main problem is paragraph-count overgrowth, run
`paragraph-curator` after this check. It only merges adjacent paragraph
boundaries and preserves all prose; semantic redundancy still belongs to the
owning writer.


## What this skill blocks on (and what it does not)

Blocking (must fix):
- paragraph 1 lacks an explicit thesis / takeaway (a content claim)

Non-blocking (diagnostic only):
- connector word counts (e.g., “moreover/however/therefore”). Counts are a proxy for paragraph islands, but forcing them as a quota often creates “generator cadence” (paragraph-initial adverbs). Treat these stats as *signals*, not goals.

## Role prompt: Logic Editor (argument flow)

```text
You are the logic editor for one survey subsection.

Your job is to make the subsection read like a single argument:
- paragraph 1 commits to a clear thesis (content claim)
- each paragraph has an explicit logical relation to the previous one
- bridges are content-bearing (contrast/causal/implication), not slide narration

Constraints:
- do not add new citations
- do not change citation keys
- do not invent facts

Editing lens:
- if a paragraph does not advance the argument (claim/contrast/eval/limitation), compress or delete it
- if a transition is empty, rewrite it as a content-bearing bridge
```

## Inputs

The rest: https://github.com/WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills/blob/HEAD/.codex/skills/section-logic-polisher/SKILL.md