mcpbeat Sign in

Writing Systems Papers Skill for Claude

Paragraph-level structural blueprint for 10-12 page systems papers targeting OSDI, SOSP, ASPLOS, NSDI, and EuroSys. Provides page allocation, paragraph templates, and writing patterns. Use when user says \"写系统论文\", \"systems paper structure\", \"OSDI paper\", \"SOSP paper\", or wants fine-grained structural guidance for a systems conference submission.

2k tokens
context cost
the whole folder, loaded on every use
1
files
instructions only
0
copies elsewhere
how many repositories repackaged it
14221
stars on the repo
on the repository, not the skill itself

Install

one command, takes just this skill from the repository
npx skills add https://github.com/wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep --skill writing-systems-papers

What it tells the agent to use

found in the instruction text
Bash runs shell commands — read the instruction before connecting
WebFetch fetches pages from the network
WebSearch reads your files

The instruction itself

22 sections, as written by the author

Writing Systems Papers: Paragraph-Level Blueprint

Structural guidance for $ARGUMENTS

Relationship to Other ARIS Skills

  • paper-write: General paper generation workflow with citation verification. This skill complements it with systems-specific structural blueprints.
  • paper-slides: Conference presentation generation (Beamer+PPTX). Already covers talks — no overlap.
  • paper-plan: Research outline creation. Use paper-plan first, then this skill for paragraph-level structure.

Boundary: paper-write handles the generation workflow (LaTeX output, DBLP verification, section-by-section drafting). This skill provides the structural skeleton — page budgets, paragraph roles, and writing patterns specific to systems venues.


Page Allocation: 12-Page Systems Paper

| Section | Pages | Key Content |

|---------|-------|-------------|

| Abstract | ~0.25 | 150–250 words, 5 sentences |

| S1 Introduction | 1.5–2 | Problem → Gap → Insight → Contributions |

| S2 Background & Motivation | 1–1.5 | Terms + Production observations |

| S3 Design | 3–4 | Architecture + Modules + Alternatives |

| S4 Implementation | 0.5–1 | Prototype, LOC, engineering |

| S5 Evaluation | 3–4 | Setup + E2E + Ablation + Scalability |

| S6 Related Work | 1 | By methodology, explicit comparison |

| S7 Conclusion | 0.5 | 3-sentence summary |


Section Blueprints

Abstract (5 sentences)

S1: Problem context and importance
S2: Gap in existing approaches
S3: Thesis — "X is better for Y in environment Z" (Irene Zhang formula)
S4: Approach summary + headline results
S5: Impact or availability

Sources: Levin & Redell — "Can you state the new idea concisely?"; Irene Zhang — "abstract cannot use terms introduced in the paper."

S1 Introduction (1.5–2 pages)

  • Problem (~0.5p) — Domain + concrete numbers + why it matters
  • Gap analysis (~0.5p) — G1–Gn: specific shortcomings with evidence
  • Key insight (1 para) — Thesis: "X is better for Y in Z"
  • Contributions (~0.5p) — 3–5 numbered, testable claims with §N references

Pattern: hzwer Move 1 (territory) → Move 2 (niche) → Move 3 (occupy).

S2 Background & Motivation (1–1.5 pages)

  • Technical background (~0.5p) — Define-before-use (Gernot Heiser)
  • Observations (~0.5–1p) — O1, O2, O3 from production data → design insights

S3 Design (3–4 pages)

  • Architecture overview (~0.5p) — Diagram first (Yi Ding: "draw a picture first")
  • Module details (~2–2.5p) — Per module: choice, alternatives, why
  • Trade-offs (~0.5–1p) — Summary of design decisions

Rule: "Every design choice must discuss alternatives" (Irene Zhang).

S4 Implementation (0.5–1 page)

Language, LOC, framework, key engineering decisions. Keep concise.

S5 Evaluation (3–4 pages)

  • Setup (~0.5p) — Hardware, baselines, workloads, metrics
  • End-to-end (~1–1.5p) — X vs baselines for Y on Z
  • Ablation (~1–1.5p) — Remove each component, measure impact
  • Scalability (~0.5p) — Behavior at increasing scale

Three-statement rule (Irene Zhang): Every conclusion stated as:

  • Hypothesis (section opening)
  • Conclusion (section closing)
  • Caption (figure caption)

Group by methodology. For each group: what they do, limitation, how we differ.

S7 Conclusion (0.5 page)

Three sentences: problem, solution, result. No new information.


Writing Patterns

Pattern 1: Gap Analysis

Enumerate G1–Gn in intro → A1–An in design → verify in evaluation.

*Example*: Lucid (ASPLOS'23) — 5 gaps mapped to 5 answers.

Pattern 2: Observation-Driven

O1–O3 from production data → insights → design components.

*Example*: GFS (arXiv 2025) — 3 observations drive 3 components.

Pattern 3: Contribution List

Numbered contributions in intro, each with §N cross-reference.

*Example*: Blox (EuroSys'24) — 7 contributions; Sia (SOSP'23) — 5 contributions.

Pattern 4: Thesis Formula

"X is better for Y in Z" structures the entire paper.

Combine with other patterns for maximum impact.


Conference Differences

> Always verify against current CFP — rules change yearly.

| Venue | Format | Pages | Camera-Ready |

|-------|--------|-------|-------------|

| OSDI | USENIX | 12 | 14 |

| NSDI | USENIX | 12 | 14 |

| SOSP | ACM SIGOPS | 12 | — |

| ASPLOS | ACM SIGPLAN | 11 | 13 |

| EuroSys | ACM | 12 | — |

Based on 2025/2026 CFPs.


Workflow

1. Determine venue and page limit
2. Choose writing pattern (Gap/Observation/Contribution/Thesis)
3. Allocate pages per section using the table above
4. Draft Abstract following 5-sentence template
5. Draft Introduction: Problem → Gap → Insight → Contributions
6. Draft Motivation with production observations (if available)
7. Draw architecture figure, then write Design
8. Draft Implementation (concise)
9. Draft Evaluation: setup → E2E → ablation → scalability
10. Draft Related Work by methodology groups
11. Draft Conclusion: 3 sentences
12. Run pre-submission checklist
13. Hand off to /paper-write for LaTeX generation and citation verification

Quick Self-Check

  • [ ] Thesis follows "X is better for Y in Z"
  • [ ] 3–5 numbered contributions with §N references
  • [ ] Design discusses alternatives for every major choice
  • [ ] Eval conclusions stated 3 times (hypothesis, result, caption)
  • [ ] Related work grouped by methodology
  • [ ] Page budget within venue limits
  • [ ] No fabricated observations, traces, or results
  • [ ] All citations verified (delegate to /paper-write)

Academic Integrity

  • Never fabricate observations, traces, or experimental results
  • Never generate citations from memory — use /paper-write citation workflow
  • Disclose LLM use per venue policy
  • This blueprint provides structural guidance, not copy-paste text

Authoritative Sources

  • Levin & Redell — "How (and How Not) to Write a Good Systems Paper" (USENIX)
  • Irene Zhang — "Hints on how to write an SOSP paper"
  • Gernot Heiser — Style Guide + Paper Writing Talk
  • Timothy Roscoe — "Writing reviews for systems conferences"
  • Yi Ding — "How to write good systems papers?"
  • hzwer & DingXiaoH — WritingAIPaper (GitHub)

Other skills for the same job

different authors, same section of the catalogue
Scholar Evaluation
by christophacham
×3

Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and writing with quantitative scoring and actionable feedback.

11k tokens scripts
Search First
by loulanyue
×1

Research-before-coding workflow. Search for existing tools, libraries, and patterns before writing custom code. Invokes the researcher agent.

2k tokens
Scientific Writing
by christophacham
×1

Core skill for the deep research and writing tool. Write scientific manuscripts in full paragraphs (never bullet points). Use two-stage process with (1) section outlines with key points using research-lookup then (2) convert to flowing prose. IMRAD structure, citations (APA/AMA/Vancouver), figures/tables, reporting guidelines (CONSORT/STROBE/PRISMA), for research papers and journal submissions.

58k tokens
Scientific Writing
by ComeOnOliver
×1

Core skill for the deep research and writing tool. Write scientific manuscripts in full paragraphs (never bullet points). Use two-stage process with (1) section outlines with key points using research-lookup then (2) convert to flowing prose. IMRAD structure, citations (APA/AMA/Vancouver), figures/tables, reporting guidelines (CONSORT/STROBE/PRISMA), for research papers and journal submissions.

63k tokens
Scientific Writing
by ComeOnOliver
×1

Core skill for the deep research and writing tool. Write scientific manuscripts in full paragraphs (never bullet points). Use two-stage process: (1) create section outlines with key points using research-lookup, (2) convert to flowing prose. IMRAD structure, citations (APA/AMA/Vancouver), figures/tables, reporting guidelines (CONSORT/STROBE/PRISMA), for research papers and journal submissions.

42k tokens
Systems Paper Writing
by Orchestra-Research

Comprehensive guide for writing systems papers targeting OSDI, SOSP, ASPLOS, NSDI, and EuroSys. Provides paragraph-level structural blueprints, writing patterns, venue-specific checklists, reviewer guidelines, LaTeX templates, and conference deadlines. Use this skill for all systems conference paper writing.

39k tokens
Legal Writing
by anthropics
vendor

> Structural feedback on a legal writing draft (memo, brief, paper, exam essay) — organization, analysis depth, clarity, citation form. NEVER rewrites the draft. Use when the user says "feedback on my memo", "read my draft", or "critique my brief".

2k tokens
Scholarly Writing Refiner
by zebbern

Polishes academic English paragraph by paragraph, reviewing grammar, word choice, voice, coherence, and sentence structure. Outputs revision suggestions alongside polished text. Triggered by phrases like 'polish this paragraph,' 'check the grammar,' 'rewrite in academic English,' or keywords like manuscript editing, SCI polishing, and journal submission editing.

6k tokens

How to use it

Copy the folder

Take wanshuiyin/auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep-writing-systems-papers from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.

Check the name does not clash

The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.