| name | proofread |
| description | Manuscript proofreading dispatching the academic-proofreader agent. Checks 6 categories — structure, claims-evidence alignment, identification fidelity, writing quality, grammar, and compilation. Produces report without editing files. |
| argument-hint | [filename or 'all'] |
| allowed-tools | ["Read","Grep","Glob","Write","Task"] |
Proofread Manuscript
Run the proofreading protocol by dispatching the academic-proofreader agent.
Workflow
Step 1: Identify Files
- If
$ARGUMENTS is a specific .tex file: review that file
- If
$ARGUMENTS is all: review paper/main.tex and all files in Paper/sections/
- If
$ARGUMENTS is a talk file in Talks/: review as advisory (non-blocking)
Step 2: Launch academic-proofreader Agent
Delegate to the academic-proofreader agent via Task tool:
Prompt: Review [file] through all 6 check categories.
Categories:
1. Structure — contribution in first 2 pages, standard sequence, transitions
2. Claims-Evidence — numbers match tables exactly, effect sizes with units
3. Identification Fidelity — paper matches strategy memo, estimand correct
4. Writing Quality — anti-hedging, notation consistency, terminology
5. Grammar & Polish — agreement, articles, tense, artifacts, informality
6. Compilation & LaTeX — overfull hbox, undefined refs/cites, XeLaTeX errors
Save report to quality_reports/[FILENAME_WITHOUT_EXT]_proofread_report.md
Step 3: Scoring
The academic-proofreader applies deductions (0-100 scale):
| Issue | Deduction |
|---|
| Numbers don't match tables | -25 |
| Paper doesn't compile | -20 |
| Broken citations | -15 |
| Broken references | -15 |
| Overfull hbox > 10pt | -10 per |
| Hedging language | -5 per (max -15) |
| Notation inconsistency | -5 |
| Overfull hbox 1-10pt | -1 per |
Step 4: Format-Aware Severity
| Context | Scoring |
|---|
| Paper manuscript | Blocking — score gates commits and PRs |
| Talks | Advisory — reported but non-blocking |
Step 5: Present Summary
- Total issues by category
- Score with deductions listed
- Top 3 most critical issues
- Three-strikes escalation (if applicable):
- Claims don't match → escalate to Coder
- Strategy misrepresented → escalate to causal-strategist
- Framing issues → escalate to User
IMPORTANT
Do NOT edit any source files. Only produce the report. Fixes are applied separately.
Principles
- academic-proofreader is a CRITIC, not a creator. It never writes or revises.
- Be precise. Quote exact text, cite exact line numbers.
- Proportional severity. A missing comma is Minor. Numbers that don't match tables is Critical.
- Format-aware. Papers are blocking; talks are advisory.