メニュー
Use this skill to explicitly articulate, structure, and defend the scientific contributions and novelty of an academic study in a clear, rigorous, and reviewer-proof manner.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Use this skill to construct rigorous scientific conclusions that critically evaluate limitations, compare biological groups, extract meaningful scientific insights, and connect findings to real-world professional applications rather than providing superficial summaries.
Use this skill to systematically translate entomological morphology, development, and ecology into concrete forensic interpretations including post-mortem interval estimation, neglect detection, and decomposition stage analysis.
Use this skill to systematically compare anatomical traits across insect orders and families in order to support classification, differentiation, and functional biological interpretation.
Use this skill to transform simple visual or descriptive observations into rigorous anatomical explanations that link structure to function, taxonomy, and scientific differentiation.
Use this skill to scientifically explain insect life cycles and developmental strategies by rigorously contrasting holometabolous and hemimetabolous metamorphosis while integrating larval stages, pupation, nymphal development, and forensic implications.
Use this skill to construct comprehensive scientific anatomy sections that rigorously describe insect head, thorax, and abdomen structures while integrating function, variation, and taxonomic significance.
| name | scientific-contribution-clarification |
| description | Use this skill to explicitly articulate, structure, and defend the scientific contributions and novelty of an academic study in a clear, rigorous, and reviewer-proof manner. |
A manuscript must clearly state what is new, why it matters, and how it advances the field.
Implicit contributions are considered absent contributions.
Every study must define contributions across at least one of:
Each contribution must explicitly correspond to:
No gap → no contribution.
Contributions must be stated in a dedicated section or paragraph using direct language such as:
“This study makes the following contributions:”
Never rely on implication.
For each contribution, clearly explain:
Each contribution must include:
Why it matters must be explicit.
Contributions must be supported by:
No unsupported self-praise.
Contributions should be:
For each contribution, the AI agent must be able to answer:
“Could this reasonably be claimed by earlier studies?”
If yes, it is not a valid contribution.
You are positioning the paper in the research landscape as a genuine advancement.
Your task is to make novelty undeniable.
If a reviewer cannot easily list the paper’s contributions after reading, the manuscript has failed.
