/cs-syllabus
/cs:syllabus <syllabus-file-or-paste> — Generate curated supplementary reading list from any course syllabus. 3-Q grill-me (input format + audience + year range) + grouping checkpoint → Consensus searches per section with applied-domain weaving → .docx via bundled JS script with
$ npx -y skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this command gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfClaude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/cs-syllabus
Context preview
What this command does when you run it.
/cs:syllabus <syllabus-file-or-paste> — Generate curated supplementary reading list from any course syllabus. 3-Q grill-me (input format + audience + year range) + grouping checkpoint → Consensus searches per section with applied-domain weaving → .docx via bundled JS script with
Command definition
cs-syllabus.mdname: "cs-syllabus"
description: "/cs:syllabus <syllabus-file-or-paste> — Generate curated supplementary reading list from any course syllabus. 3-Q grill-me (input format + audience + year range) + grouping checkpoint → Consensus searches per section with applied-domain weaving → .docx via bundled JS script with audience-calibrated summaries + Bloom higher-order discussion questions."
/cs:syllabus — Course Supplementary Reading List
**Command:** `/cs:syllabus <syllabus-file-or-paste>`
The `cs-syllabus` persona produces a `.docx` reading list of recent peer-reviewed research per course section.
When to Run
- Adding supplementary readings to an existing course
- Updating a syllabus with current research
- Checking what's recent in your field for course planning
- Even casual mentions when a syllabus is attached
Forcing Intake (3 Questions, One at a Time)
| Q | Asks | Notes | |---|---|---| | Q1 | Syllabus input: file path / pasted content / image | refuses missing syllabus | | Q2 | Course audience: undergrad-intro / undergrad-advanced / grad-masters / grad-doctoral / professional / mixed | drives summary jargon + discussion-question complexity | | Q3 | Year range: 1 / 2 / 5 years | drives `year_min` on every Consensus search; default 2 |
What You Get
reading_list_<course-slug>_<YYYY-MM-DD>.docx
Structure:
- Title page (course name, subtitle, date)
- Introduction (with Consensus app link)
- Course Learning Outcomes (boxed section)
- Sections (6-12, from grouping):
Each section = numbered papers, each with:
- Clickable hyperlinked title
- Author / journal / year (italic)
- Summary (plain language, audience-calibrated)
- Discussion Question (Bloom higher-order, tied to learning outcome)
- Footer (generation metadata)Grouping Checkpoint (After Phase 2)
After parsing the syllabus, the skill **halts** with a forcing-options prompt:
Proposed sections: [list with item counts]. Pick one:
1. Looks good — proceed with these sections
2. Merge sections [X] and [Y]
3. Split section [X] into two
4. Add a section for [topic]
5. Remove section [X]
This is the last cheap moment to correct course before search budget is consumed. **Refuses to start Phase 3 without explicit user choice.**
Discipline
- **One intake Q per turn.** Never bundle.
- **Halt at grouping checkpoint.** No Phase 3 without user.
- **Sequential Consensus.** 1 q/sec.
- **Applied-domain weaving** — search "enzyme kinetics food processing" not just "enzyme kinetics". Boosts paper relevance dramatically.
- **Audience-calibrated summaries** — undergrad-intro defines every term; grad-doctoral assumes technical fluency.
- **Bloom higher-order discussion questions** — apply / analyze / evaluate. NOT recall ("what did the authors find?").
- **Source discipline** — only Consensus session results. Training knowledge labeled.
- **Three-count tracking** — sent / received / cited.
- **Bundled JS DOCX generator** — don't inline 300 lines of layout code.
Quality Bars
Summary
| ✅ Good | ❌ Bad | |---|---| | "This review maps how different diets — Mediterranean, Nordic, vegetarian — reshape the types of fat molecules circulating in your blood, with implications for heart disease risk." | "This paper reviews lipidomic profiles across dietary interventions and their cardiometabolic implications." (Too jargon-heavy) |
Discussion Question
| ✅ Good | ❌ Bad | |---|---| | "If dietary fat quality can reshape your lipoprotein lipidome, what does this suggest about the biochemical basis for dietary guidelines recommending unsaturated over saturated fats?" | "What did the authors find?" (Just recall) |
Workflow
# Phase 0 intake (Q1-Q3)
python ../skills/syllabus/scripts/citation_tracker.py --action start --session NAME
# Phase 1 parse (PDF/DOCX/text/image-appropriate reader)
# Phase 2 group + CHECKPOINT (wait for user)
python ../skills/syllabus/scripts/topic_grouper.py --topics-file /tmp/topics.json
# Phase 3 search (sequential Consensus 1 q/sec, applied-domain weaving)
# Phase 4 write summaries + discussion questions
python ../skills/syllabus/scripts/discussion_question_validator.py --questions-file /tmp/qs.json
# Phase 5 generate .docx via bundled script
node ../skills/syllabus/scripts/generate_reading_list.js \
--input /tmp/data.json \
--output /path/to/reading_list_<course>_<date>.docx
# Phase 6 deliver
python ../skills/syllabus/scripts/citation_tracker.py --action close --session NAME
Trigger Phrases
- "syllabus reading list"
- "find papers for my course"
- "create a reading list from this syllabus"
- "recent research for my class"
- "supplementary readings"
- "find journal articles for these topics"
- "what recent papers cover this material"
- "any new research on these course topics"
- "update my syllabus with recent papers"
- Casual mentions when syllabus is attached
Anti-Patterns Rejected
- Parallelizing Consensus calls (rate limit)
- Searching topics without applied-domain angle (poor relevance)
- Padding sections with fabricated entries when Consensus thin
- Generic discussion questions ("What did the authors find?")
- Jargon-heavy summaries unsuitable for course audience
- Skipping group-and-confirm step
- Truncating Consensus URLs in hyperlinks
- Inlining 300 lines of docx-generation JavaScript in skill body
Related
- Agent: [`cs-syllabus`](../agents/cs-syllabus.md)
- Skill: [`syllabus`](../skills/syllabus/SKILL.md)
- Source spec: [`megaprompts/10-syllabus-megaprompt.md`](../../../megaprompts/10-syllabus-megaprompt.md)
- Siblings: `/cs:litreview`, `/cs:grants`, `/cs:patent`, `/cs:dossier`, `/cs:pulse`
---
**Version:** 1.0.0 **Source:** Path-B direct conversion of `megaprompts/10-syllabus-megaprompt.md`
Read more
name: "cs-syllabus" description: "/cs:syllabus <syllabus-file-or-paste> — Generate curated supplementary reading list from any course syllabus. 3-Q grill-me (input format + audience + year range) + grouping checkpoint → Consensus searches per section with applied-domain weaving → .docx via bundled JS script with audience-calibrated summaries + Bloom higher-order discussion questions."
/cs:syllabus — Course Supplementary Reading List
**Command:** `/cs:syllabus <syllabus-file-or-paste>`
The `cs-syllabus` persona produces a `.docx` reading list of recent peer-reviewed research per course section.
When to Run
- Adding supplementary readings to an existing course
- Updating a syllabus with current research
- Checking what's recent in your field for course planning
- Even casual mentions when a syllabus is attached
Forcing Intake (3 Questions, One at a Time)
| Q | Asks | Notes | |---|---|---| | Q1 | Syllabus input: file path / pasted content / image | refuses missing syllabus | | Q2 | Course audience: undergrad-intro / undergrad-advanced / grad-masters / grad-doctoral / professional / mixed | drives summary jargon + discussion-question complexity | | Q3 | Year range: 1 / 2 / 5 years | drives `year_min` on every Consensus search; default 2 |
What You Get
reading_list_<course-slug>_<YYYY-MM-DD>.docx
Structure:
- Title page (course name, subtitle, date)
- Introduction (with Consensus app link)
- Course Learning Outcomes (boxed section)
- Sections (6-12, from grouping):
Each section = numbered papers, each with:
- Clickable hyperlinked title
- Author / journal / year (italic)
- Summary (plain language, audience-calibrated)
- Discussion Question (Bloom higher-order, tied to learning outcome)
- Footer (generation metadata)Grouping Checkpoint (After Phase 2)
After parsing the syllabus, the skill **halts** with a forcing-options prompt:
Proposed sections: [list with item counts]. Pick one: 1. Looks good — proceed with these sections 2. Merge sections [X] and [Y] 3. Split section [X] into two 4. Add a section for [topic] 5. Remove section [X]
This is the last cheap moment to correct course before search budget is consumed. **Refuses to start Phase 3 without explicit user choice.**
Discipline
- **One intake Q per turn.** Never bundle.
- **Halt at grouping checkpoint.** No Phase 3 without user.
- **Sequential Consensus.** 1 q/sec.
- **Applied-domain weaving** — search "enzyme kinetics food processing" not just "enzyme kinetics". Boosts paper relevance dramatically.
- **Audience-calibrated summaries** — undergrad-intro defines every term; grad-doctoral assumes technical fluency.
- **Bloom higher-order discussion questions** — apply / analyze / evaluate. NOT recall ("what did the authors find?").
- **Source discipline** — only Consensus session results. Training knowledge labeled.
- **Three-count tracking** — sent / received / cited.
- **Bundled JS DOCX generator** — don't inline 300 lines of layout code.
Quality Bars
Summary
| ✅ Good | ❌ Bad | |---|---| | "This review maps how different diets — Mediterranean, Nordic, vegetarian — reshape the types of fat molecules circulating in your blood, with implications for heart disease risk." | "This paper reviews lipidomic profiles across dietary interventions and their cardiometabolic implications." (Too jargon-heavy) |
Discussion Question
| ✅ Good | ❌ Bad | |---|---| | "If dietary fat quality can reshape your lipoprotein lipidome, what does this suggest about the biochemical basis for dietary guidelines recommending unsaturated over saturated fats?" | "What did the authors find?" (Just recall) |
Workflow
# Phase 0 intake (Q1-Q3) python ../skills/syllabus/scripts/citation_tracker.py --action start --session NAME # Phase 1 parse (PDF/DOCX/text/image-appropriate reader) # Phase 2 group + CHECKPOINT (wait for user) python ../skills/syllabus/scripts/topic_grouper.py --topics-file /tmp/topics.json # Phase 3 search (sequential Consensus 1 q/sec, applied-domain weaving) # Phase 4 write summaries + discussion questions python ../skills/syllabus/scripts/discussion_question_validator.py --questions-file /tmp/qs.json # Phase 5 generate .docx via bundled script node ../skills/syllabus/scripts/generate_reading_list.js \ --input /tmp/data.json \ --output /path/to/reading_list_<course>_<date>.docx # Phase 6 deliver python ../skills/syllabus/scripts/citation_tracker.py --action close --session NAME
Trigger Phrases
- "syllabus reading list"
- "find papers for my course"
- "create a reading list from this syllabus"
- "recent research for my class"
- "supplementary readings"
- "find journal articles for these topics"
- "what recent papers cover this material"
- "any new research on these course topics"
- "update my syllabus with recent papers"
- Casual mentions when syllabus is attached
Anti-Patterns Rejected
- Parallelizing Consensus calls (rate limit)
- Searching topics without applied-domain angle (poor relevance)
- Padding sections with fabricated entries when Consensus thin
- Generic discussion questions ("What did the authors find?")
- Jargon-heavy summaries unsuitable for course audience
- Skipping group-and-confirm step
- Truncating Consensus URLs in hyperlinks
- Inlining 300 lines of docx-generation JavaScript in skill body
Related
- Agent: [`cs-syllabus`](../agents/cs-syllabus.md)
- Skill: [`syllabus`](../skills/syllabus/SKILL.md)
- Source spec: [`megaprompts/10-syllabus-megaprompt.md`](../../../megaprompts/10-syllabus-megaprompt.md)
- Siblings: `/cs:litreview`, `/cs:grants`, `/cs:patent`, `/cs:dossier`, `/cs:pulse`
---
**Version:** 1.0.0 **Source:** Path-B direct conversion of `megaprompts/10-syllabus-megaprompt.md`
362 production-ready Claude Code skills, plugins, and agent skills for 13 AI coding tools. The most comprehensive open-source library of Claude Code skills and agent plugins — also works with OpenAI Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, and 9 more coding agents.
Repo: alirezarezvani/claude-skills
Other commands on claude-skills.
- /focused-fix
Deep-dive feature repair — systematically fix an entire feature/module across all its files and dependencies. Usage: /focused-fix <feature-path>
Open command - /clean
Clean up merged branches locally and on remote, keeping only main, dev, and gh-pages.
Open command - /cm
Stage working tree changes and create a Conventional Commit (no push).
Open command - /cp
Stage, commit, and push the current branch following git governance rules.
Open command - /pr
Create a pull request from the current branch.
Open command - /plugin-audit
Comprehensive audit pipeline for skills, plugins, agents, and commands. Validates structure, quality, security, marketplace compliance, cross-platform compatibility, and ecosystem integration. Runs all built-in validation tools, invokes domain-appropriate agents for code review,
Open command

