| name | proofread |
| description | Academic proofreading for LaTeX papers. Grammar, notation consistency, citation format, tone, LaTeX issues, citation voice balance, and TikZ diagram review. Report-only — never edits source files. |
| allowed-tools | Read, Glob, Grep |
| argument-hint | ["project-path or tex-file"] |
Academic Proofreading
Report-only skill. Never edit source files — produce PROOFREAD-REPORT.md only.
When to Use
- Before sending a draft to supervisors
- Before submission to a journal/conference
- After major revisions to check consistency
- When you want a fresh-eyes check on writing quality
When NOT to Use
- Formal audits — use the Referee 2 agent for systematic verification
- Argument quality — use
$devils-advocate for logical scrutiny
- Citation completeness — use
$validate-bib for bibliography cross-referencing (though this skill flags obvious citation format issues)
Workflow
- Locate files: Find all
.tex files in the project (and .log files for LaTeX diagnostics)
- Read the document: Read all
.tex source files in order
- Run 7 check categories (below)
- Produce report: Write
PROOFREAD-REPORT.md in a proofread/ subfolder of the project directory (create it if it does not exist)
Check Categories
1. Grammar & Spelling
- Spelling errors (including technical terms)
- Subject-verb agreement
- Sentence fragments or run-ons
- Misused words (e.g., "effect" vs "affect", "which" vs "that")
- American English is the default for all papers and conference articles. Flag any British English spellings (e.g., -ise, -our, -re, analyse, scepticism).
2. Notation Consistency
- Variable notation used consistently throughout (e.g., always
$x_i$ or always $x_{i}$, not both)
- Subscript/superscript style (e.g.,
$\beta_1$ vs $\beta_{OLS}$)
- Matrix/vector formatting conventions (bold, uppercase, etc.)
- Consistent use of
\mathbb, \mathcal, \mathbf for sets, operators, vectors
- Equation numbering: all referenced equations numbered, unreferenced ones unnumbered
3. Citation Format
- Consistent use of
\citet (textual) vs \citep (parenthetical)
- No raw
\cite{} when \citet/\citep is available
- Author name spelling matches between text mentions and citation keys
- Multiple citations in chronological or alphabetical order (check which convention)
- No "As shown by (Author, Year)" — should be "As shown by \citet{key}"
4. Academic Tone
- No informal contractions (don't, can't, won't → do not, cannot, will not)
- No first-person overuse (some "we" is fine; excessive "I think" is not)
- No casual hedging ("pretty much", "kind of", "a lot")
- Appropriate use of hedging language ("suggests" vs "proves")
- No exclamation marks in body text
- Consistent tense (present for established facts, past for specific studies)
5. LaTeX-Specific Issues
- Overfull hbox: Check
.log file for Overfull \hbox warnings — report line numbers and severity (badness)
- Equation overflow: Long equations that exceed column/page width
- Float placement: Check for
[h!] or [H] overuse; prefer [tbp]
- Missing labels: Figures/tables/equations referenced but without
\label{}
- Orphan/widow lines: Check for
\\ abuse that creates bad page breaks
- Unresolved references:
?? in output indicating broken \ref{} or \cite{}
6. Citation Voice Balance
Check the ratio of in-line (\citet) to parenthetical (\citep) citations:
- Count in-line vs parenthetical citations across the full document
- Flag if ratio exceeds 1:1 (in-line should be the minority) — Major
- Flag runs of 3+ consecutive in-line citations in a paragraph or section — Major
- Flag paragraphs that open with an in-line citation when the author's identity isn't the point — Minor
- Flag "As shown by \citet{}" patterns where parenthetical would be more natural — Minor
- Report the overall ratio (e.g., "42 parenthetical, 28 in-line — ratio 1.5:1")
See docs/conventions.md § Citation Voice Balance for the full convention.
7. TikZ Diagram Review
If the document contains TikZ code (\begin{tikzpicture} or \tikz):
- Label positioning: Labels not overlapping nodes or edges
- Geometric accuracy: Coordinates and angles consistent with intended layout
- Visual semantics: Arrow styles match meaning (solid = direct, dashed = indirect, etc.)
- Spacing: Nodes not too cramped or too spread out
- Consistency: Style matches across all diagrams in the document
- Standalone compilability: Each diagram should compile independently
Severity Levels
| Level | Definition | Example |
|---|
| Critical | Will be noticed by reviewers, may cause rejection | Broken references, major grammar errors, inconsistent core notation |
| Major | Noticeable quality issue | Inconsistent citation style, tone issues, overfull hbox > 10pt |
| Minor | Polish issue | Occasional British/American mix, minor spacing |
Quality Scoring
Apply numeric quality scoring using the shared framework and skill-specific rubric:
Start at 100, deduct per issue found, apply verdict. Insert the Score Block into the report after the summary table.
Report Format
# Proofread Report
**Document:** [filename]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Pages:** [approximate]
## Summary
| Category | Critical | Major | Minor |
|----------|----------|-------|-------|
| Grammar & spelling | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Notation consistency | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Citation format | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Academic tone | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| LaTeX-specific | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Citation voice balance | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| TikZ diagrams | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| **Total** | **0** | **0** | **0** |
## Critical Issues
[List each with file, line/section, and specific issue]
## Major Issues
[List each with file, line/section, and specific issue]
## Minor Issues
[List each with file, line/section, and specific issue]
## Quality Score
| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| **Score** | XX / 100 |
| **Verdict** | Ship / Ship with notes / Revise / Revise (major) / Blocked |
### Deductions
| # | Issue | Tier | Deduction | Category |
|---|-------|------|-----------|----------|
| 1 | [description] | [tier] | -X | [category] |
| | **Total deductions** | | **-XX** | |
## Recommendations
[Optional: overall observations about the writing — prioritise fixes by deduction size]
Cross-References
$validate-bib — For thorough bibliography cross-referencing- Referee 2 agent — For formal code + paper auditing
$devils-advocate — For argument quality and logical scrutiny
