proof-writer

Formalize ML/AI theorem proofs into structured PROOF_PACKAGE.md files.

Updated Jun 10, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/xqinag/ARIS-new --skill proof-writer-xqinag
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: proof-writer
Source: https://github.com/xqinag/ARIS-new/tree/main/skills/proof-writer
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/xqinag/ARIS-new --skill proof-writer-xqinag

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Writes mathematically honest proofs for ML/AI theory. When asked to prove a theorem, lemma, proposition, or corollary, fills in missing proof steps and formalizes a proof sketch.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Produces complete, structured Proof Packages with explicit claims, assumptions, and notation.
  • Normalizes the exact statement, identifies gaps, and suggests corrections or blockage reports.
  • Generates a dependency map and step-by-step justification to support reproducible research workflows.

Quick Start

Summarize the exact theorem and assumptions, then request a full Proof Package with a dependency map and steps.

Frequently Asked Questions about proof-writer

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I formalize a proof sketch for an ML theory theorem?▼

To formalize a proof sketch for ML theory, provide the explicit theorem statement, assumptions, and notation. The tool fills missing steps and generates a structured PROOF_PACKAGE.md with a dependency map and stepwise justifications.

What is the best way to write rigorous proofs for machine learning lemmas?▼

Writing rigorous proofs for ML lemmas requires normalizing the exact claim, identifying logical gaps, and generating step-by-step justifications. This process outputs a complete formal argument structured for reproducible research workflows.

Can I use this to fill gaps in a proposition proof for AI theory?▼

Yes, you can fill gaps in proposition proofs by supplying your existing sketch. It analyzes the provided assumptions, suggests corrections or blockage reports, and outputs a fully justified formal argument.

Do I need to provide exact assumptions and notation to formalize a corollary proof?▼

Yes, providing exact assumptions and notation is required. Formalizing a corollary proof depends on explicit statements of the claim and user-provided sketches to successfully generate a complete, mathematically honest proof package.

What limitations exist when converting informal proof ideas into complete formal arguments?▼

Limitations arise when the initial theorem statement lacks explicit claims or assumptions. If the sketch has unresolvable logical gaps, the process outputs a blockage report detailing the missing dependencies rather than forcing a complete formal argument.