skills/skills-codex/render-html/SKILL.md
Render an ARIS Markdown / JSON artifact (IDEA_REPORT, AUTO_REVIEW, KILL_ARGUMENT, PAPER_PLAN, research-wiki state, etc.) into a single-file HTML view designed for human reading. Use when the user says "渲染 HTML", "出一份 HTML 报告", "render html", "make this readable", "export to html", or wants a polished web-rendered view of a Markdown artifact.
npx skillsauth add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep render-htmlInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Markdown is for writers. HTML is for readers. ARIS workflow nodes write Markdown (canonical, audit-trail-friendly, machine-parseable).
/render-htmlturns selected artifacts into a polished single-file HTML view for the human who actually has to read them. The Markdown stays the source of truth.
Use /render-html for ARIS artifacts that have a real human reader:
| Artifact | Why HTML helps | Template |
|----------|----------------|----------|
| idea-stage/IDEA_REPORT.md | Ranked ideas + pilot signal + scores feel like a decision dashboard, not a flat list | academic |
| review-stage/AUTO_REVIEW.md (+ REVIEW_STATE.json) | Round-by-round score progression + weakness status; pass --state to embed the JSON | academic |
| paper/KILL_ARGUMENT.md (+ KILL_ARGUMENT.json) | Per-point attack/defense with <details> Q&A cards + red/yellow/green callouts | academic |
| research-wiki/SUMMARY.md (or research-wiki/index.md) | Cross-entity cockpit: papers / ideas / experiments / claims at a glance | dashboard |
| PAPER_PLAN.md (optional) | Claims-evidence matrix renders better as a polished table than raw MD | academic |
| RESUBMIT_REPORT.{md,json} (optional) | 7-state failure-mode ledger | academic or dashboard |
Do NOT use for:
SKILL.md files — those are internal LLM-facing protocol..aris/traces/* review traces — forensic debug, not human display.--review to force it. See § HTML Review Gate below.<meta> tags AND in the visible page header. If the HTML and source diverge, the meta tells you which version of the source produced it.node_modules. Just one .html.--offline fallback. MathJax 3 and highlight.js load from cdn.jsdelivr.net by default. Pass --offline to skip both — math will appear as raw $x$, code blocks won't get syntax highlighting, but everything stays readable.render_html.py uses only re, html, hashlib, json, datetime, pathlib, argparse, sys. No pip install required.<script>/<style>/<iframe>/<object>/<embed>/<form>/<input>/<button>/<link>/<meta>/<base> tags, all on* event-handler attributes (onclick, onload, …), and rewrites javascript:/vbscript:/data: href/src/action schemes to #blocked-unsafe-url:. ARIS workflow artifacts should not contain these in the first place, but the sanitizer is the safety net in case an LLM hallucinates one. Markdown text content is HTML-escaped separately and never reaches the sanitizer.Arch C self-contained: the canonical implementation lives at skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py (this SKILL's own scripts/ subdirectory), together with its templates at skills/render-html/scripts/templates/{academic,dashboard}.html. The helper is new — no legacy tools/ shim exists.
Resolve $RENDER_HTML with the Codex hybrid chain (managed project install, in-repo checkout, ARIS repo fallback, then copied global Codex skill install). This is Policy A — skill-local gate:
RENDER_HTML=""
cd "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd)" || exit 1
if [ -z "${ARIS_REPO:-}" ] && [ -f .aris/installed-skills-codex.txt ]; then
ARIS_REPO=$(awk -F'\t' '$1=="repo_root"{print $2; exit}' .aris/installed-skills-codex.txt 2>/dev/null) || true
fi
[ -f ".agents/skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py" ] && RENDER_HTML=".agents/skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py"
[ -z "$RENDER_HTML" ] && [ -f "skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py" ] && RENDER_HTML="skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py"
[ -z "$RENDER_HTML" ] && [ -n "${ARIS_REPO:-}" ] && [ -f "$ARIS_REPO/skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py" ] && RENDER_HTML="$ARIS_REPO/skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py"
[ -z "$RENDER_HTML" ] && [ -f ~/.codex/skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py ] && RENDER_HTML="$HOME/.codex/skills/render-html/scripts/render_html.py"
[ -z "$RENDER_HTML" ] && {
echo "ERROR: render_html.py not resolved at .agents/skills/render-html/scripts/, skills/render-html/scripts/, \$ARIS_REPO/skills/render-html/scripts/, or ~/.codex/skills/render-html/scripts/." >&2
echo " /render-html cannot produce HTML output. Fix: rerun install_aris_codex.sh, export ARIS_REPO, or copy the render-html skill into ~/.codex/skills/." >&2
exit 1
}
# Default: academic template, output to <input>.html alongside source
python3 "$RENDER_HTML" idea-stage/IDEA_REPORT.md
# Dashboard template for cockpit-style views
python3 "$RENDER_HTML" research-wiki/SUMMARY.md --template dashboard
# Custom output path + title + eyebrow
python3 "$RENDER_HTML" review-stage/AUTO_REVIEW.md \
--out review-stage/AUTO_REVIEW.html \
--title "Auto Review — overnight run" \
--eyebrow "Workflow 2"
# Embed sidecar state JSON (rendered as a folded <details> JSON block at end)
python3 "$RENDER_HTML" review-stage/AUTO_REVIEW.md \
--state review-stage/REVIEW_STATE.json
# Embed sidecar JSON (e.g., for KILL_ARGUMENT.md + KILL_ARGUMENT.json)
python3 "$RENDER_HTML" paper/KILL_ARGUMENT.md \
--json paper/KILL_ARGUMENT.json \
--title "Kill Argument — adversarial review"
# Offline (no CDN; math + code render as plain text)
python3 "$RENDER_HTML" idea-stage/IDEA_REPORT.md --offline
# JSON-only input (wrapped in a <pre><code class="language-json"> block)
python3 "$RENDER_HTML" review-stage/REVIEW_STATE.json --template dashboard
# Language attr (default zh-CN; set for English-primary artifacts)
python3 "$RENDER_HTML" docs/SKILLS_CATALOG.md --lang en
# Skip review (academic template otherwise reviews by default)
python3 "$RENDER_HTML" idea-stage/IDEA_REPORT.md
# … then the skill skips the spawn_agent review step if --no-review
# was on the command line. Pass --review to a dashboard render to force it.
The --review / --no-review flags are parsed by the SKILL orchestrator
(Claude Code), not by render_html.py. The helper itself stays pure
stdlib and never calls MCP. See § HTML Review Gate below for the
exact resolution and prompt.
From $ARGUMENTS, determine what to render. Common patterns:
idea-stage/IDEA_REPORT.md, academic templatereview-stage/AUTO_REVIEW.md + --state review-stage/REVIEW_STATE.jsonpaper/KILL_ARGUMENT.md + --json paper/KILL_ARGUMENT.jsonresearch-wiki/SUMMARY.md or generate from raw entity counts (Phase 2 work; for Phase 1 just render SUMMARY.md if present, else fall back to listing top-level wiki structure)academic (default): linear long-form. Sticky TOC sidebar + serif body + callouts + tables + math + Q&A <details>. Use for IDEA_REPORT, AUTO_REVIEW, KILL_ARGUMENT, PAPER_PLAN.dashboard: grid layout, smaller font, denser metrics cards, no TOC sidebar. Use for research-wiki cockpit, RESUBMIT_REPORT, multi-project overviews.Use the resolver above to get $RENDER_HTML, then invoke. The script writes the HTML alongside the source by default (or wherever --out says) and prints a one-line confirmation including the source SHA256 prefix.
Decide whether to run review. Per ARIS invariant "executor must not judge its own output", the academic-template HTML is reviewed by a fresh cross-family Codex thread before being claimed as a delivered view. Resolution:
should_review = explicit --review present
or (template == "academic" and --no-review NOT present)
So:
--template academic (default) → review by default. Skip with --no-review.--template dashboard → no review by default. Force with --review.If should_review is true, fire a fresh spawn_agent call (NEVER send_input) with the prompt below. The reviewer reads the source MD + generated HTML directly; it does not see this skill's intermediate state.
Scope of review (narrow on purpose). The HTML reviewer audits render fidelity / safety / structure only — not claim truthfulness. Claim audit belongs upstream (/paper-claim-audit, /research-review, /result-to-claim). Specifically the reviewer checks:
<details> blocks / math delimiters survive parsing> 🚨 … got .callout-bad, > 💡 … got .callout-info, etc.<script> / onclick= / javascript: / unreplaced placeholders / template-leak survivesCodex prompt (mandatory shape). Send this as a fresh reviewer call (spawn_agent, NOT send_input):
You are an independent ARIS HTML render auditor. This is a fresh review thread.
Read these files directly:
- Source artifact: <ABS path to source.md or source.json>
- Generated HTML: <ABS path to out.html>
- Optional sidecars: <state.json>, <kill_argument.json> (if any)
Task: Audit whether the generated HTML is a faithful, safe, structurally
usable view of the source artifact. Do NOT judge whether the research
claims are true. Judge only rendering fidelity.
Checks:
1. Information fidelity — sections / claims / tables / code blocks /
lists / math / sidecars not silently dropped or materially altered.
2. Structural integrity — heading hierarchy, tables, nested lists,
code fences, details/summary, math delimiters preserved.
3. Callout routing — warning/critical/good/info blockquotes map to
appropriate CSS classes when present.
4. Safety/escaping — no unexpected raw script/style/iframe/form/
event-handler/javascript/data URL survives from source.
5. Placeholder/template leakage — no unreplaced {{PLACEHOLDER}} or
parser private placeholder character appears.
6. Expected differences — frontmatter strip, generated header/footer/
meta, TOC insertion, sanitized unsafe HTML are EXPECTED and not a
defect.
Return STRICT JSON first, then a short prose note:
{
"verdict": "PASS|WARN|FAIL|ERROR",
"checks": {
"source_hash_match": "pass|warn|fail|unknown",
"information_fidelity": "pass|warn|fail",
"structure": "pass|warn|fail",
"math_code_tables": "pass|warn|fail",
"callouts": "pass|warn|fail|not_applicable",
"safety_escaping": "pass|warn|fail",
"placeholder_leak": "pass|warn|fail"
},
"blocking_issues": [
{"severity": "fail",
"source_location": "L<n>...",
"html_location": "<selector or near-text>",
"issue": "...",
"suggested_fix": "..."}
],
"warnings": [
{"severity": "warn", "issue": "...", "suggested_fix": "..."}
],
"summary": "one paragraph"
}
Verdict rules:
- PASS: no material fidelity/safety issue.
- WARN: readable output with minor unsupported-Markdown or cosmetic
degradation only.
- FAIL: missing/altered meaningful content, broken tables/math/code/
callouts that change interpretation, unsafe executable HTML, source
hash mismatch, or placeholder leakage.
- ERROR: files could not be read or audit could not complete.
Save outputs:
<out_path>.review.json (sibling to the HTML)..aris/traces/render-html/<YYYY-MM-DD>_run<NN>/review.{txt,json} per shared-references/review-tracing.md.verdict, N blocking, N warnings, trace: <path>.If verdict == FAIL: the HTML is NOT a delivered review-passed view. Tell the user the blocking issues, point them at the source (fix MD or template, not the HTML), and re-render. Do not silently overwrite or mark as complete.
If verdict == WARN: deliver the HTML but surface the warning list. User decides whether to fix or accept.
If spawn_agent is not available (e.g., user runs /render-html on a Codex-CLI-only setup where Codex MCP isn't wired): emit verdict: REVIEW_UNAVAILABLE to the sidecar, do not fabricate PASS, and tell the user the HTML was generated but not independently reviewed. The user can manually invoke /research-review on the source MD or re-run with Codex MCP available.
open <out.html> on macOS, xdg-open on Linux, start on Windows. Math + code highlighting need internet (CDN); offline mode degrades gracefully to readable text.
Markdown subset (chosen to match what ARIS workflows actually emit):
#/##/###/#### with auto-generated IDs for TOC**x**, italic *x* / _x_, inline code `x`, strikethrough ~~x~~, links [t](url), images ```python) — gets <pre><code class="language-python"> for highlight.js<pre class="diagram"> with a distinct cream-yellow background:--- / :---: / ---: alignment> ... — emoji-prefix detection routes to callout variants:
⚠️ → .callout-warn (Warning)💡 / 📝 → .callout-info (Tip / Note)✅ / 🔒 → .callout-good (OK / Guarantee)❌ / 🚨 → .callout-bad (Blocked / Critical)<details>, <summary>, <div>, <figure>, <table>, <section>, etc. (block-level) — used for the existing Round-1/2/3 fix details in KILL_ARGUMENT.md$x$ and display $$x$$ pass through verbatim to MathJaxWhat the helper does NOT support (intentional simplifications):
[^1])[label][ref]=== / --- underline form — ARIS doesn't emit these)Frontmatter (--- ... ---) at the very top of the file is stripped before rendering (SKILL.md frontmatter style); the body that follows is what gets converted.
Phase 1 (this skill, currently shipped): Opt-in only. Users explicitly call /render-html <artifact.md> after a workflow completes. No existing skill changes. Lets us validate which HTML views are actually useful before automating.
Phase 2 (later, planned): Selectively auto-emit HTML at workflow termination:
/idea-discovery completes → also writes idea-stage/IDEA_REPORT.html (academic)/auto-review-loop terminates → also writes review-stage/AUTO_REVIEW.html (academic, with --state)/kill-argument already writes .md + .json → naturally extends to + .html/research-pipeline final report links to the HTML files above (doesn't re-render)/research-wiki render subcommand generates research-wiki/index.html dashboard/paper-writing does not auto-emit HTML (the final reader artifact is PDF)Phase 2 will be guarded by a — html: true flag in each affected skill, defaulting to false until we have empirical evidence the HTML views are read.
The two templates live at skills/render-html/scripts/templates/{academic,dashboard}.html. Each is a single self-contained HTML file with inline CSS using {{PLACEHOLDER}} substitution. To customize:
my_brand.html.:root { ... } to change colors, the font stack, or layout dimensions.--template choices in render_html.py argparse./render-html <input> --template my_brand.The default templates are derived from the user's own academic-newspaper tutorial style (Source Serif Pro + Songti SC, 3-color palette, sticky TOC, low-flash). Stay close to that idiom for ARIS artifacts unless you have a specific reason to break the visual language.
For deck / poster / Xiaohongshu card / tweet card / data report style outputs, point users to html-anything (Apache-2.0, 3000⭐ at time of writing). It ships 75 SKILL.md templates across 9 surfaces and detects 8 coding-agent CLIs (including Claude Code, Codex, Copilot). ARIS does not depend on it — /render-html covers ARIS-native artifacts; html-anything is the recommended path for richer publishing surfaces.
/proof-checker, /paper-claim-audit, /citation-audit, /kill-argument gate their respective products. --no-review exists for fast iteration but should not be the way you ship./paper-claim-audit, /result-to-claim, /research-review. The HTML reviewer asks: "did the renderer faithfully + safely convert this source?" — nothing more.--offline is for air-gapped runs / archival.pip install dependency to render_html.py requires an explicit decision — the helper currently has none. MCP calls live in the skill orchestrator, never in the helper script.research
Generate a structured paper outline from review conclusions and experiment results. Use when user says \"写大纲\", \"paper outline\", \"plan the paper\", \"论文规划\", or wants to create a paper plan before writing.
research
Generate a structured paper outline from review conclusions and experiment results. Use when user says "写大纲", "paper outline", "plan the paper", "论文规划", or wants to create a paper plan before writing.
development
Get a deep critical review of research from an external reviewer backend (Codex or manual). Use when user says "review my research", "help me review", "get external review", or wants critical feedback on research ideas, papers, or experimental results.
research
Turn a vague research direction into a problem-anchored, elegant, frontier-aware, implementation-oriented method plan via iterative GPT-5.5 review. Use when the user says "refine my approach", "帮我细化方案", "decompose this problem", "打磨idea", "refine research plan", "细化研究方案", or wants a concrete research method that stays simple, focused, and top-venue ready instead of a vague or overbuilt idea.