Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.
8.3
Rating
0
Installs
Documentation
Category
Exceptional peer review skill with comprehensive, actionable guidance. The description clearly delineates use cases and boundaries versus related skills (scientific-critical-thinking, scholar-evaluation). Task knowledge is outstanding—provides a complete 7-stage workflow covering initial assessment through final checklist, with detailed evaluation criteria for methods, statistics, reproducibility, ethics, and figures. Includes specialized guidance for different manuscript types and a critical workflow for presentations (mandatory image-based PDF review). Structure is excellent: concise overview with detailed staged workflow and supporting reference files. The skill demonstrates high novelty by codifying expert-level peer review methodology that would require extensive prompting for a CLI agent to replicate, including discipline-specific reporting standards (CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA), statistical rigor checks, and ethical considerations. The presentation review section is particularly innovative with its mandatory image conversion protocol to avoid PDF parsing failures. Minor improvement possible in making the structure even more scannable for quick reference, but overall this is a highly professional, production-ready skill.
K-Dense-AI
Skill Author
Loading SKILL.md…
