Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
From claude-scholar
Provides a systematic quality assurance checklist for academic papers, covering structure, logic, citations, claims, figures, and writing clarity.
npx claudepluginhub galaxy-dawn/claude-scholar --plugin claude-scholarHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/claude-scholar:paper-self-reviewThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
A systematic paper quality checking tool that helps researchers conduct comprehensive self-review before submission.
Audits academic papers pre-submission using parallel agents for content, numerical consistency, references/DOIs, writing quality, figures/formatting, and replication archives.
Audits academic manuscripts for macro-coherence, argumentative structure, citation hygiene, and submission readiness, producing prioritized refactoring reports.
Use this skill for "review this paper", "review this manuscript", "peer review", "review my paper", "critique this manuscript", "review this submission", "give me feedback on my paper", "check my methods", "review my statistics", "review as a peer reviewer", "evaluate this manuscript", "review this PDF", or mentions manuscript review, peer review, paper critique, or methodological review.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
A systematic paper quality checking tool that helps researchers conduct comprehensive self-review before submission.
Check whether all sections of the paper are complete and conform to academic standards:
Verify the logical coherence of the paper:
Check the completeness and accuracy of citations:
Check whether the paper's claims are supported by the available evidence:
This audit does not replace results-analysis for statistics or citation-verification for bibliographic verification. It checks whether paper claims correctly use the available evidence.
Evaluate the quality and effectiveness of figures and tables:
Check writing clarity and readability:
Use this checklist for systematic paper self-review:
Paper Quality Checklist:
- [ ] Abstract includes problem, method, results, contributions
- [ ] Introduction clearly states research motivation
- [ ] Method is reproducible
- [ ] Results support conclusions
- [ ] Main claims are supported by named evidence
- [ ] Over-strong claims are weakened or removed
- [ ] Discussion addresses limitations
- [ ] All figures/tables have captions
- [ ] Citations are complete and accurate
Use this skill in the following scenarios:
Follow these steps for systematic paper review:
Start with the overall structure, checking if all sections are complete and logically coherent.
Dive into each section, checking content accuracy and completeness.
Check whether each major claim is supported by the evidence available in the draft, analysis bundle, citations, or project notes.
Use this output shape:
## Claim Audit
Claim:
Verdict: keep | weaken | revise | remove
Evidence used:
Missing evidence:
Overclaim risk:
Suggested wording:
Verify the completeness and accuracy of all citations.
Check the quality and captions of all figures and tables.
Review language expression and writing clarity.
Use the quality checklist for final verification.
The Paper Self-Review skill provides a systematic paper quality checking process, helping researchers identify and resolve issues before submission, improving paper quality and acceptance rates.
Load only what is needed:
references/SECTION-CHECKLIST.md - section-by-section review questionsreferences/FINAL-VERDICT.md - how to summarize submission readiness and blocking issuesexamples/example-self-review.md - example review output