Install
$ agentstack add skill-prasad-nimbalkar-claude-agent-skills-text-summarizer ✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
About
Text Summarizer
Why this skill exists
Not all summaries are equal. A research paper needs a different summary than a legal contract or a news article. This skill matches the summary format and depth to the content type and the user's actual goal.
When to use
- User provides long text, a document, or a URL and wants it condensed
- User asks for key points, highlights, or a brief version
- User wants a summary for a specific audience (executive, technical, layman)
Step-by-step procedure
Step 1 — Identify content type and user goal
Before summarizing, determine:
| Content Type | Best Summary Style | |---|---| | News article | 3-sentence inverted pyramid (who, what, why it matters) | | Research paper | Abstract + methodology + findings + limitations | | Legal document | Parties, obligations, key clauses, risks | | Meeting transcript | Decisions made, action items, owners, deadlines | | Book chapter | Main argument + supporting points + key examples | | Technical doc | Purpose + prerequisites + main steps + gotchas | | Email thread | Context + current status + what's needed from reader | | Long report | Executive summary + section-by-section highlights |
Ask if unclear: "Who is this summary for — yourself, a colleague, an exec? Any specific aspect to focus on?"
Step 2 — Choose summary depth
| User says | Summary length | |-----------|---------------| | "TL;DR" | 1–3 sentences | | "Key points" | 5–8 bullet points | | "Summarize" | 15–25% of original length | | "Brief summary" | 10% of original length | | "Detailed summary" | 30–40% with structure preserved | | "Executive summary" | 1 paragraph + 3–5 bullets |
Step 3 — Summarize by content type
News / Article:
[WHAT HAPPENED — 1 sentence]
[KEY DETAILS — 2–3 sentences]
[WHY IT MATTERS — 1 sentence]
Research Paper:
RESEARCH QUESTION: [one sentence]
METHOD: [how they studied it]
KEY FINDINGS: [bullet list of results]
CONCLUSION: [what it means]
LIMITATIONS: [what they acknowledge as gaps]
Meeting / Transcript:
DATE: [date]
ATTENDEES: [names/roles]
DECISIONS MADE:
- [decision 1]
- [decision 2]
ACTION ITEMS:
- [ ] [task] — [owner] — [deadline]
- [ ] [task] — [owner] — [deadline]
OPEN QUESTIONS:
- [unresolved item]
Legal Document:
DOCUMENT TYPE: [contract/NDA/ToS/etc.]
PARTIES: [who is involved]
EFFECTIVE DATE: [date]
KEY OBLIGATIONS:
- [Party A must...]
- [Party B must...]
IMPORTANT CLAUSES:
- [clause: plain English explanation]
FLAGS TO REVIEW:
🔴 [high-risk clause]
🟡 [clause needing attention]
Long Report / Document:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
[2–3 sentence overview]
KEY FINDINGS
• [Finding 1]
• [Finding 2]
• [Finding 3]
SECTION HIGHLIGHTS
[Section name]: [1–2 sentence summary]
[Section name]: [1–2 sentence summary]
BOTTOM LINE / RECOMMENDATION
[What action the document implies or recommends]
Step 4 — Quality check before responding
Before outputting, verify:
- [ ] Did I capture the main argument/finding, not just surface details?
- [ ] Did I preserve any numbers, dates, or proper nouns that matter?
- [ ] Is the summary self-contained — can someone understand it without reading the original?
- [ ] Did I match the requested length?
- [ ] Did I avoid introducing anything not in the original?
Edge cases
| Situation | Fix | |-----------|-----| | Text is too long for context | Summarize in chunks, then summarize the summaries | | Multiple documents | Summarize each, then write a cross-document synthesis | | Content is in another language | Summarize in the original language unless user specifies English | | User wants summary + action items | Add a separate "Next Steps" section | | Contradictory content | Flag it: "Note: the document contains conflicting statements on X" | | Highly technical content | Ask user's background level before choosing vocabulary |
Output format
Always end with:
- Word count of original vs summary
- Optional: offer to adjust length or focus area
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: prasad-nimbalkar
- Source: prasad-nimbalkar/claude-agent-skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet — be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.