Agent Skills › PlanExeOrg/PlanExe › extract-parameters-from-full

extract-parameters-from-full

GitHub

从PlanExe报告中提取关键参数、建模值和变量，输出严格JSON格式，用于蒙特卡洛模拟或敏感性分析。

experiments/napkin_math/.claude/skills/extract-parameters-from-full/SKILL.md PlanExeOrg/PlanExe

Trigger Scenarios

用户要求从报告中提取参数或建模值用户提供报告文件并请求结构化输入

Install

npx skills add PlanExeOrg/PlanExe --skill extract-parameters-from-full -g -y

More Options

Non-standard path

npx skills add https://github.com/PlanExeOrg/PlanExe/tree/main/experiments/napkin_math/.claude/skills/extract-parameters-from-full -g -y

Use without installing

npx skills use PlanExeOrg/PlanExe@extract-parameters-from-full

指定 Agent (Claude Code)

npx skills add PlanExeOrg/PlanExe --skill extract-parameters-from-full -a claude-code -g -y

安装 repo 全部 skill

npx skills add PlanExeOrg/PlanExe --all -g -y

预览 repo 内 skill

npx skills add PlanExeOrg/PlanExe --list

SKILL.md

Frontmatter

{
    "name": "extract-parameters-from-full",
    "description": "Use when the user wants to extract parameters, modelling values, or key variables from a PlanExe report (HTML or text) for napkin math, triage, or Monte Carlo simulation"
}

Extract Parameters from a PlanExe Report

Overview

Wraps the quantitative-triage system prompt at system-prompt.txt (next to this file) and applies it to a PlanExe report the user supplies. Output is strict JSON matching the schema in the system prompt — no markdown, no commentary.

When to Use

User says "extract parameters", "extract modelling values", "pull key variables", or similar from a PlanExe report
User points at a PlanExe report file (typically HTML, may be 100KB–1MB+) and wants structured input for downstream simulation
User wants a triage list of values that would matter for Monte Carlo or sensitivity analysis

Not for: full report summarisation, narrative analysis, code generation. The system prompt explicitly forbids those.

Workflow

Get the report path. If the user did not provide one, ask. Do not guess.
Read system-prompt.txt (sibling of this SKILL.md). Treat its contents as the authoritative extraction instructions — every rule, hard limit, and schema constraint applies.
Read the report file. For large HTML reports, read the whole file; the system prompt's hard limits (≤8 key_values, ≤5 of each list, ≤25-word comments) keep output bounded regardless of input size.
Produce the JSON following the exact schema at the end of system-prompt.txt. Apply every "Important", "Additional modelling rules", and "Formula and dependency rules" section as you generate each field.
Output destination. Default: print JSON to the chat. If the user asks for a file, write to the path they specify. If they want a default file path, suggest <report-basename>.parameters.json next to the report.

Hard Rules (from system-prompt.txt — re-stated for emphasis)

JSON only. No markdown fences, no prose, no explanation before or after.
Percentages as fractions between 0 and 1 with unit: "fraction". Never value: 60 for 60%.
No invented ids in formula_hint — every variable must be declared in key_values, missing_values_to_estimate, or the object's own depends_on.
Every entry with a non-null formula_hint MUST also declare output_name (snake_case id of the computed value) and output_unit (e.g. "DKK", "people", "fraction"). Downstream consumers — generate-calculations, run-scenarios, monte-carlo — read these directly and do not parse formula_hint or pattern-match on tokens. The LLM is the single authority for both fields.
Prefer missing-but-needed values over minor explicit values. Don't dump every budget line.
Clean source_text — strip citations, footnote markers, replacement chars, UI artifacts.

Common Mistakes

Mistake	Fix
Wrapping JSON in ```json fences	Raw JSON only — the system prompt forbids markdown
Returning >8 key_values "because the report has many"	Hard cap. Triage. The point is to surface the few that matter
Including `suggested_low/base/high` by default	Only include when essential to the value's meaning
Using `value: 60` for "60%"	Use `value: 0.6` and `unit: "fraction"`
Citing variable in `formula_hint` that isn't declared anywhere	Either add it to `missing_values_to_estimate` or rewrite the formula
Picking a descriptive timeline value over a funding gate	Prefer the gate — it determines pass/fail