| name | dh-review |
| description | Digital humanities peer review simulation and supervisor feedback parsing. Simulates technical, humanistic, and interdisciplinary reviewer perspectives calibrated to your target venue. Parses unstructured supervisor feedback into a structured revision roadmap. The DH-specific "bridge review" evaluates whether your computational and humanistic work genuinely connect. |
dh-review — Feedback & Review
What This Skill Does
dh-review provides two types of assistance:
-
Review simulation: Evaluates your DH paper from three perspectives — technical (methodology, data, reproducibility), humanistic (argument, scholarship, interpretation), and interdisciplinary (the DH bridge). Also includes devil's advocate challenge.
-
Feedback parsing: Transforms unstructured supervisor, advisor, or peer reviewer comments into a prioritized, actionable revision roadmap.
Who It's For
- Graduate students preparing to submit a paper and wanting pre-submission review
- Researchers who have received supervisor or reviewer feedback and need help prioritizing the revision
- Anyone wanting to stress-test their DH argument before exposing it to real reviewers
Modes and Trigger Keywords
| Mode | Trigger | What Happens |
|---|
full-review | /dh-review or /dh-review full-review | Complete multi-perspective review (all 4 review agents) |
supervisor-feedback | /dh-review supervisor-feedback | Parse supervisor/reviewer comments → revision roadmap |
technical-focus | /dh-review technical-focus | Computational methodology and reproducibility review only |
humanities-focus | /dh-review humanities-focus | Humanistic argument and scholarly engagement review only |
interdisciplinary | /dh-review interdisciplinary | DH bridge review only — does the paper justify being DH? |
quick-assess | /dh-review quick-assess | Rapid high-level assessment; ~10 minutes |
Mode Routing
-
Always start with intake: Read agents/intake_agent.md to detect input type and configure review balance.
-
Route by mode:
full-review: Execute all four review agents in sequence, then compile the Reviewer Decision
supervisor-feedback: Execute supervisor_feedback_agent.md only
technical-focus: Execute technical_reviewer_agent.md only
humanities-focus: Execute humanities_reviewer_agent.md only
interdisciplinary: Execute interdisciplinary_reviewer_agent.md only
quick-assess: Execute all four agents; limit each to 150 words; compile a condensed report
Review Calibration
Before the review, read references/reviewer_calibration_guide.md and set the technical/humanistic weight ratio based on the target venue. The balance shifts from 35/65 (DHQ) to 65/35 (Cultural Analytics).
The Reviewer Decision (Full Review Output)
After full-review, produce a single consolidated output:
## Reviewer Decision
**Paper**: [title]
**Target Venue**: [venue]
**Review Date**: [date]
**Overall Recommendation**: [Accept (minor revisions) | Minor Revisions | Major Revisions | Reject/Resubmit]
**Scores**:
| Criterion | Score (1–5) |
|---|---|
| Research Question Quality | [n] |
| Corpus Integrity | [n] |
| Methodological Soundness | [n] |
| Interpretive Depth | [n] |
| Scholarly Engagement | [n] |
| DH Bridge | [n] |
| **Overall** | **[n]** |
**Summary**: [2–3 paragraph integrated review — synthesis of all three reviewer perspectives]
**Revision Roadmap**: [Tier 1 / Tier 2 / Tier 3 items, consolidated from all reviewers]
Handoff
After full-review: the Reviewer Decision + Revision Roadmap is detected by dh-write's intake agent when passed into a revision mode session.
After supervisor-feedback: the Revision Roadmap is detected by dh-write revision mode.
In dh-pipeline, Stage 5.5 uses this skill's supervisor-feedback mode to process advisor feedback between review rounds.