/inno-grant-proposal

id: inno-grant-proposal
name: inno-grant-proposal
version: 1.0.0
description: |-
  Help professors and researchers write, revise, adapt, and polish grant proposals for US agencies (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA, NASA) and Chinese agencies (NSFC 国自然).
stages: ["publication"]
tools: ["read_file", "search_project", "write_file", "run_terminal"]
summary: |-
  Help professors and researchers write, revise, adapt, and polish grant proposals for US agencies (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA, NASA) and Chinese agencies (NSFC 国自然). Use this skill whenever the user mentions grants, proposals, funding application...
primaryIntent: writing
intents: ["writing", "research"]
capabilities: ["visualization-reporting", "research-planning"]
domains: ["general"]
keywords: ["inno-grant-proposal", "grant writing", "visualization-reporting", "research-planning", "inno", "grant", "proposal", "help", "professors", "researchers", "write", "revise"]
source: builtin
status: verified
upstream:
  repo: dr-claw
  path: skills/inno-grant-proposal
  revision: 8322dc4ef575affaa374aa7922c0a0971c6db7d7
resourceFlags:
  hasReferences: true
  hasScripts: true
  hasTemplates: true
  hasAssets: false
  referenceCount: 14
  scriptCount: 3
  templateCount: 7
  assetCount: 0
  optionalScripts: true

inno-grant-proposal

Canonical Summary

Help professors and researchers write, revise, adapt, and polish grant proposals for US agencies (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA, NASA) and Chinese agencies (NSFC 国自然). Use this skill whenever the user mentions grants, proposals, funding application...

Trigger Rules

Use this skill when the user request matches its research workflow scope. Prefer the bundled resources instead of recreating templates or reference material. Keep outputs traceable to project files, citations, scripts, or upstream evidence.

Resource Use Rules

• Read from `references/` only when the current task needs the extra detail.
• Treat `scripts/` as optional helpers. Run them only when their dependencies are available, keep outputs in the project workspace, and explain a manual fallback if execution is blocked.
• Reuse files under `templates/` instead of recreating equivalent structure from scratch when the user asks for the matching deliverable.

Execution Contract

• Resolve every relative path from this skill directory first.
• Prefer inspection before mutation when invoking bundled scripts.
• If a required runtime, CLI, credential, or API is unavailable, explain the blocker and continue with the best manual fallback instead of silently skipping the step.
• Do not write generated artifacts back into the skill directory; save them inside the active project workspace.

Upstream Instructions

Grant Proposal Skill

Core Philosophy

Three principles govern every interaction:

1. **Grant applications are arguments, not requests.** Every section must advance a persuasive case. The narrative arc is: problem is important, you are the right person, your approach will work, the investment is justified. 2. **Write like a domain expert, not a template filler.** Generic language kills proposals. Every sentence must reflect deep knowledge of the specific field. 3. **Grant is not Paper.** A paper reports results; a grant sells a future. Different narrative arc, different evidence standards, different rhetoric.

Additional operating principles:

• **Reviewer perspective, not applicant perspective.** Always ask: "What would a

tired reviewer scanning 80 proposals think when reading this sentence?"

• **Every claim needs evidence; every expense needs task traceability.**
• **Two-phase drafting model:** internal planning (with numbered scaffolding) is

always purged before producing final output. The user never sees S1/S2/S3/S4 markers or internal notes in deliverables.

---

Routing Logic

On first interaction, determine the track:

IF user mentions NSFC / 国自然 / 青年基金 / 面上 / 地区 / 重点 / Chinese agency
   → CN MODE
ELIF user mentions NSF / NIH / DOE / DARPA / NASA / R01 / R21 / CAREER / US agency
   → US MODE
ELSE
   → ASK: "Are you targeting a US agency (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA, NASA) or a
     Chinese agency (NSFC programs)? This determines the template, structure,
     and review criteria I will use."

**Language strategy:**

• CN mode: draft proposal content in Chinese (中文), but interact in whatever

language the user uses.

• US mode: draft proposal content in English, interact in whatever language the

user uses.

• Internal skill instructions are always in English.

---

State Persistence

All session state is saved to `GRANT_STATE.json` in the working directory.

GRANT_STATE.json Schema

{
  "meta": {
    "track": "US" | "CN",
    "agency": "NSF" | "NIH" | "DOE" | "DARPA" | "NASA" | "NSFC",
    "program": "string (e.g., CAREER, R01, 青年科学基金)",
    "created": "ISO-8601",
    "last_modified": "ISO-8601",
    "current_phase": "0"|"1"|"2"|"3"|"4"|"5"|"complete",
    "current_step": "string"
  },
  "profile": {
    "applicant_name": "",
    "institution": "",
    "career_stage": "early | mid | senior",
    "field": "",
    "subfield": "",
    "roi_score": 0-15,
    "recommended_programs": []
  },
  "structure": {
    "title": "",
    "claims_aims_evidence_matrix": [],
    "outline": {},
    "figure_plan": []
  },
  "drafts": {
    "section_name": {
      "version": 1,
      "status": "planning | drafting | polished | reviewed",
      "file_path": "",
      "backup_path": ""
    }
  },
  "review": {
    "tier1_results": {},
    "tier2_results": {},
    "severity_report": []
  },
  "simulated_review": {
    "scores": {},
    "weaknesses": [],
    "revision_suggestions": []
  }
}

**Rules:**

• Read `GRANT_STATE.json` at the start of every conversation turn to resume context.
• Write `GRANT_STATE.json` after completing any phase or significant sub-step.
• If the file does not exist, create it during Phase 0.

---

Safety Rules

1. **Auto-backup before writes.** Before overwriting any file, copy the exi