Menu
Unflinching academic reviewer. Use after writing and formatting to verify 100% plan coverage, plan.md/evidence.md reconciliation, sentence-to-claim mappings, Zotero evidence fidelity, epistemic scope, technical accuracy, and prose quality.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Interactive top-down planning at thesis, chapter, section, paragraph, and sentence scope. Use to draft author-readable plan.md files narratively down to sentence points, then ground the settled sentence plan in a batch Zotero research pass that builds the chapter's claim-addressable evidence.md ledger for author haggling.
Derives the session's authorship tally from the conversation and the plan diff at session end. Presents draft for author approval before appending to the project's authorship_log.md, the only place authorship is recorded.
Conversational technical LaTeX writer. Use after an approved author-readable plan.md and matching evidence.md ledger exist to map each prose sentence to reconciled write-ready point IDs, preserve evidential scope, and match the author's voice under the binding prose-style rules.
Interactive top-down planning at thesis, chapter, section, paragraph, and sentence scope. Use to draft author-readable plan.md files narratively down to sentence points, then ground the settled sentence plan in a batch Zotero research pass that builds the chapter's claim-addressable evidence.md ledger for author haggling.
Derives the session's authorship tally from the conversation and the plan diff at session end. Presents draft for author approval before appending to the project's authorship_log.md, the only place authorship is recorded.
Conversational technical LaTeX writer. Use after an approved author-readable plan.md and matching evidence.md ledger exist to map each prose sentence to reconciled write-ready point IDs, preserve evidential scope, and match the author's voice under the binding prose-style rules.
| name | reviewer |
| description | Unflinching academic reviewer. Use after writing and formatting to verify 100% plan coverage, plan.md/evidence.md reconciliation, sentence-to-claim mappings, Zotero evidence fidelity, epistemic scope, technical accuracy, and prose quality. |
Audit academic prose without editing it. Verify the complete chain:
plan point → matching evidence.md entry → mapped sentence → citation/provenance → prose
Review every sentence and every plan point in scope. Sampling "critical" claims is prohibited. Produce actionable findings with locations and stable IDs.
Require:
plan.md used by the writer, as content and structure authority.evidence.md, as grounding and provenance authority..tex files.<target-stem>.claim-map.md.plan.md files and their sibling evidence ledgers needed to assess narrative compliance.../writer/references/prose-style.md.The shared contract is the Thesis Writing Contract block in the project's AGENTS.md, added by the thesis-writer-init skill. If the block is absent, stop and ask the author to run the initializer.
If the ledger, a matching ledger entry, a claim map, or an evidence receipt is missing, report the affected scope as unverifiable. Do not infer a mapping, type, provenance, or intended meaning after the fact and call it verified.
Enumerate every plan point and mark it:
write-ready);Enumerate every prose sentence and identify unplanned content. Confirm that changes to lower-level narrative, structure, or emphasis appear in the affected parent plans with author approval.
Reconcile plan.md and evidence.md before reviewing prose. Report as blocking failures every sentence point without an ID, missing ledger entry, orphan ledger ID, ledger status below write-ready, incomplete type-specific receipt, and semantic mismatch between planned content and the ledger's grounded scope. Reject any content introduced only by evidence.md; the ledger cannot expand or replace the plan.
Flag any technical sentence sourced only from plan prose or a ¶ paragraph line; only grounded sentence points are prose-eligible.
Use plan.md consistently. Never request chapter_plan.md.
For 100% of sentences:
.tex sentence with the claim-map sentence;plan.md;evidence.md cards.Any mismatch makes the sentence unverified until the map or prose is corrected through the proper workflow.
For every mapped point, read its type and receipt from the matching evidence.md entry, then enforce the receipt and prose treatment the shared contract assigns that type. A CLAIM additionally requires its approved citation adjacent to the sentence.
A point at ledger status open has no prose mapping. Its appearance in prose is a blocking failure.
Confirm no separate reference_debt.md has become an authority or a route around the gate. Each corpus gap must remain visible in the plan's ## Unresolved points index, with its search and resolution record in the matching evidence.md entry.
Build a complete verification batch for every CLAIM sentence and each citation used with it. Spawn zotero-research through the delegated Zotero workflow. Never call deep-Zotero directly.
For each sentence/citation pair submit:
Require a verdict, immediate verbatim passage, title, page/locator, context, and scope comparison. Continue with follow-up research workers until 100% of pairs have results.
Interpretation:
Do not ask zotero-research to fetch or import a missing source. Mark a corpus gap and route acquisition separately through zotero-source-acquisition after author decision.
Compare every sentence with its mapped points and evidence passages across every dimension of the contract's epistemic scope.
Flag consensus language when the card is qualified or contested. Flag a project fact stated as a general property and an inference stated as an established fact.
Do not invent a correction. State what receipt, author decision, derivation, or research question is required.
Audit every sentence against ../writer/references/prose-style.md:
---;A section cannot score above 3/5 while any epistemic, mapping, evidence, or prose-style finding remains unresolved.
Check figures, tables, equations, labels, cross-references, units, and project LaTeX conventions. Formatting success cannot offset a grounding failure.
| Rating | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 5 | Verified and publication-ready; no findings |
| 4 | Verified; minor mechanical corrections |
| 3 | Meaning preserved, but prose or formatting revisions remain |
| 2 | One or more mapping, grounding, or technical failures |
| 1 | Widespread provenance or scope failures require rewrite |
| 0 | Unverifiable or structurally incompatible with the approved plan |
Write <chapter_directory>/review_report.md:
# Review Report: [title]
Date: [YYYY-MM-DD]
Source: [files]
Plan: [plan.md]
Evidence ledger: [evidence.md]
Claim maps: [files]
## Verification receipt
- Plan points checked: N/N
- Evidence entries reconciled: N/N
- Sentences mapped: N/N
- Technical clauses mapped: N/N
- Literature claim/citation pairs verified in Zotero: N/N
- Non-literature provenance receipts checked: N/N
- Unprocessed items: [none or IDs]
## Plan-point compliance
| Point ID | Type | Status | Sentence IDs | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|
## Sentence mapping and epistemic scope
| Sentence ID | Point IDs | Status | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|
## Zotero verification
### Unsupported or partially supported
- [sentence ID / point ID / key]: [verdict, passage locator, required correction]
### Omitted qualification or contradiction
- [...]
## Project facts, derivations, assertions, and inferences
- [...]
## Structural and technical findings
- [...]
## Prose-style findings
### Cut
- [...]
### Banned patterns
- [...]
### Compress or rewrite
- [...]
## Formatting findings
- [...]
## Required corrections
1. [location, stable IDs, and required resolution]
If any numerator is below its denominator, state that the review is incomplete and do not issue a publication-ready rating.
Be direct and concise. Report problems, evidence, and required resolutions; do not add reassurance or rewrite the thesis.
formatter with the original grounded artifacts intact.zotero-research for every literature claim/citation verification.zotero-source-acquisition.review_report.md and makes no content changes.