Aivc Curator

AIVC Curator

Help maintainers make consistent inclusion and placement decisions for Awesome-Virtual-Cell.

This skill is repository-specific. It should apply the current README scope and inclusion rules rather than generic biology curation instincts.

When to Use

Use this skill when the user asks:

• whether a paper should be included
• whether a dataset, benchmark, report, or video is in scope
• where an item should live in the README
• whether something is core or only related
• how to write a new README entry in the current house style

Do not use this skill as the main workflow when the user:

• wants general advice on building an awesome project
• wants broad README structure redesign
• needs a live literature search without a curation decision

Workflow

1. Read references/aivc-curation-rules.md.
2. If the task is about a concrete item, check whether the same work already appears in README.md by title, alias, acronym, DOI, or project name.
3. Extract the item type:
   • overview paper
   • research paper
   • dataset
   • benchmark or challenge
   • report or blog
   • video or talk
   • historical or foundational work
   • related resource
4. Extract the maintenance action:
   • new entry
   • update existing entry
   • duplicate or no-op
   • demote, move, or remove
5. Verify the minimum metadata needed for a reliable call:
   • canonical title
   • venue and year
   • primary link
   • optional code, dataset, benchmark, or project link
6. Judge fit against the repository’s scope:
   • core AIVC
   • adjacent but useful
   • weakly related or out of scope
7. Return a structured decision with:
   • include / update-existing / hold / exclude
   • suggested section
   • core vs related
   • duplicate status
   • short rationale
   • exact fields to correct if the recommendation is update-existing
   • missing information to verify if the call is uncertain
   • suggested README entry text if inclusion is recommended
8. If the user asks about a borderline item, explain the boundary instead of forcing a confident decision.
9. Default to Chinese unless the user is writing in English.

Output Contract

Prefer this compact structure:

收录建议：
- 结论：收录 / 更新现有 / 暂缓 / 不收录
- 建议位置：
- 属性：主线 / Related
- 重复检查：

理由：
- ...

若更新现有：
- 需要修改：

还需要确认：
- ...

建议条目写法：
- ...

For English requests, use:

Decision:
- Recommendation: include / update-existing / hold / exclude
- Suggested section:
- Placement: core / related
- Duplicate check:

Rationale:
- ...

If updating existing:
- Fields to fix:

Still needed:
- ...

Suggested README entry:
- ...

Quality Rules

• Follow the repository’s current Scope and Inclusion Rules, not personal preference.
• Prefer primary-source links and higher-confidence resources.
• Prefer updating an existing entry over adding a near-duplicate.
• If something is useful but off the main path, prefer Related Resources over forced placement in the core sections.
• Be conservative with low-confidence sources, broken links, or overly generic biomedical AI resources.
• When recommending inclusion, keep the suggested entry concise and aligned with the README’s existing format.

Reference Map

Load only the files needed for the current curation task:

• references/aivc-curation-rules.md -> executable scope, placement rules, in-scope boundaries, and entry-writing patterns for this repository
• README.md -> duplicate checks, existing wording, year buckets, and section placement
• CONTRIBUTING.md -> contributor-facing submission expectations when the user asks how to submit or format changes