Use as the final preflight before submitting to Science (AAAS) — a complete checklist across significance, format, figures, statistics, data availability, references, and required submission files, so nothing that triggers an editorial bounce is left unresolved. Bundles ready-to-fill templates.
Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
Use as the final preflight before submitting to Science (AAAS) — a complete checklist across significance, format, figures, statistics, data availability, references, and required submission files, so nothing that triggers an editorial bounce is left unresolved. Bundles ready-to-fill templates.
Submission Preflight (sci-submission)
When to trigger
The manuscript is "done" and you're about to upload.
You want a single gate that confirms every other sci-* skill's output landed.
A revision is going back and you need to confirm nothing regressed.
Master preflight checklist
Significance & framing
Clears the broad-significance / general-interest bar (sci-fit rung ≥ 3).
One-sentence advance present and demonstrated (not asserted).
Title is declarative, specific, < ~90 characters.
Format & length
Format chosen (Report ~2,500 w / ≤4 items, or Research Article ~4,500 w / ≤6 items).
Main-text word count within budget; Methods in Supplementary (for Reports).
Results ordered by argument, claim-first paragraphs.
Abstract & summary
One-sentence summary ≤ ~125 characters, not a title paraphrase.
Abstract ≤ ~125 words, no subheadings/citations, ≥1 quantified result.
Figures & display items
Within item budget; sized to 5.5/12/18 cm; fonts ≥ 6 pt.
templates/cover_letter_template.md — significance-forward cover letter scaffold.
Submission pass for Science
Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the broad discovery claim, decisive evidence, uncertainty/limitations, and why the result belongs in a general-science weekly; then test whether the manuscript addresses general-science reviewers and editors who ask whether the result changes a broad field, is technically decisive, and can be understood outside the subdiscipline.
Primary move: Verify article type, file package, length/display limits, reporting statements, data/code, ethics, competing interests, and current official instructions.
Decision ledger: return claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.
Neighbor test: compare against Nature for similar broad-scope novelty, PNAS for academy-wide breadth, specialist journals when the claim is field-internal; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.
Output format
【Blocking gaps】 [...] (must fix before upload)
【Warnings】 [...] (should fix)
【Files ready】 main / figures+legends / SM / cover letter / metadata
【Verdict】 GO / NO-GO + the top 3 fixes
【Next】 submit | sci-rebuttal (after decision)
Anti-patterns
Do not upload before accession numbers/DOIs exist.
Do not skip the integrity sweep — over-claiming is a top rejection reason post-review.
Do not rely on memory; run the checklist top to bottom.