Use as the final preflight before submitting to Molecular Cell — a complete checklist across mechanism, single-mechanism arc, length budget, figures, STAR Methods, data deposition, numbered references, front-matter artifacts, and required files. Bundles the checklist and cover-letter templates.
Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.
Quelldateien prüfen
Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Ein direkter Befehl überspringt den Prüf-Prompt. Prüfen Sie die Quelle, bevor Sie ihn ausführen.
Der Befehl bleibt in einer Zeile. Scrollen Sie horizontal, um ihn vor dem Kopieren vollständig zu prüfen.
Sie bevorzugen eine lokale Kopie? Laden Sie die Dateien herunter, die SkillsMP derzeit vorliegen.
Datei-Explorer
3 Dateien
SKILL.md wird angezeigt
SKILL.md
Quellanweisungen · Schreibgeschützte Vorschau
name
molcell-submission
description
Use as the final preflight before submitting to Molecular Cell — a complete checklist across mechanism, single-mechanism arc, length budget, figures, STAR Methods, data deposition, numbered references, front-matter artifacts, and required files. Bundles the checklist and cover-letter templates.
Submission Preflight & Cover Letter (molcell-submission)
When to trigger
The manuscript is "done" and you're about to upload to Editorial Manager.
You want a single gate confirming every other molcell-* skill's output landed.
A revision is going back and you need to confirm nothing regressed.
Master preflight checklist
Mechanism & narrative
Clears the deep-mechanism bar (molcell-fit rung ≥ 3; orthogonal validation; physiological relevance).
No over-interpretation beyond the evidence (re-read Summary + Discussion + structure claims).
Every figure's n, replicate type, error bar, and test defined and consistent with QSA.
All accession numbers/DOIs live and correct; structure map-model fit matches the deposited entry.
Single-blind by default — do not anonymize unless double-blind requested. Confirm on the portal.
What the desk editor is deciding
Submission goes through Cell Press Editorial Manager to an in-house scientific editor who makes the review-or-reject call before any referee sees the file. Two things they cannot recover later must be right at upload: the mechanistic depth (is the molecular event proven, or only proposed) and the orthogonal validation (are the independent lines already in the manuscript, not promised in a rebuttal). The cover letter exists to state both in the editor's vocabulary. Everything else in the preflight is hygiene; these two are the gate.
Do not open the cover letter with "Please find enclosed our manuscript." Open with the mechanism. A serviceable first sentence: "We show that [molecular actor] [molecular action] by [mechanistic detail], resolving how [process] is controlled and why [physiological outcome] depends on it." Then one short paragraph naming the orthogonal lines of evidence (e.g., structure + reconstitution + separation-of-function genetics), one sentence on why Molecular Cell's mechanism-focused readership specifically, and — if relevant — a candid line on concurrent related work. Keep it to a page.
Revision-specific gate
When a revised manuscript goes back, run the checklist again but add: every promised experiment from the response letter is now in the paper or explicitly justified as out of scope; every referee-driven change is reflected in both text and figures (a common regression is updating a panel but not its legend or the QSA block); the response letter and the manuscript agree on every number; no new mechanistic claim crept in without new evidence; and any re-processed structure/genomics matches the deposited entry. Version figures so an old panel cannot ship by accident.
Metadata traps specific to Cell Press
The Lead Contact is a distinct required role from the corresponding author and must match the Resource Availability statement exactly.
Molecular Cell uses single-blind review by default; do not strip author identity unless double-blind was explicitly requested — confirm the current option on the portal.
CRediT contributions, competing-interests, and funding statements must be structured fields, not only prose.
Accession numbers and the Zenodo/Mendeley code DOI must appear identically in the KRT "Deposited Data" rows, the Data and Code Availability statement, and any Editorial Manager metadata field.