Menu
Use when a humanities manuscript is about to be submitted or resubmitted and requires a final evidence-based gate covering argument, citations, terminology, files, author information, venue requirements, and disclosure.
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Use when citations, quotations, page numbers, bibliography entries, or source-supported claims must be checked for existence, metadata accuracy, textual fidelity, and claim–source fit.
Use when a manuscript contains recurring concepts, translations, abbreviations, proper names, or near-synonyms whose meanings and forms must remain stable across the argument.
Use when a humanities researcher needs to transform verified sources into a structured scholarly conversation rather than a chronological list of summaries.
Use when a humanities researcher has a broad topic, intuition, corpus, or problem but does not yet have a precise, contestable, and researchable question.
Use when a humanities argument depends on a concept whose history, competing definitions, translations, or boundaries must be reconstructed before the concept can support new claims.
Use when an interpretation must be grounded in specific textual, visual, rhetorical, formal, interface, archival, performative, or material features rather than thematic summary or theoretical labeling.
Baseado na classificação ocupacional SOC
| name | verifying-before-submission |
| description | Use when a humanities manuscript is about to be submitted or resubmitted and requires a final evidence-based gate covering argument, citations, terminology, files, author information, venue requirements, and disclosure. |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| language | en |
| license | MIT |
Provide the final release gate for a manuscript package. This skill does not repeat every earlier method in full. It verifies that required audits were performed, that their blocking issues were resolved, that the submitted files correspond to the reviewed version, and that no unsupported claim of readiness is made.
A polished PDF is not evidence of scholarly readiness. Submission readiness is a package-level state supported by traceable checks.
Accepts the final manuscript package, target venue instructions, author and funding information, prior gate reports, revision letter, supplementary files, declarations, and submission metadata.
Requires the exact files intended for submission, current venue requirements, and evidence from citation, terminology, manuscript, and peer-review gates where applicable.
Produces a package inventory, requirement matrix, unresolved-risk register, privacy and metadata check, final GateReport, and a precise PASS, CONDITIONAL PASS, or FAIL decision.
May produce a submission checklist, filename corrections, missing-document list, anonymization actions, or a release manifest with checksums.
Fails when central gate reports are absent, a blocking issue remains, the submitted file differs from the reviewed file, venue requirements cannot be checked, required declarations are missing, or the requester asks for readiness despite unresolved evidence.
Guarantees that the readiness decision is tied to documented checks and that unresolved blocking issues prevent a PASS.
Does not guarantee acceptance, legal compliance in every jurisdiction, factual truth beyond completed audits, successful file upload, or compatibility with an unknown submission system.
Use immediately before first submission, revised submission, accepted-manuscript delivery, conference upload, book-chapter handoff, repository deposit, or any claim that a manuscript is “submission-ready.”
Run it again whenever the manuscript changes after the gate. Even a small edit can alter page numbers, citations, anonymization, word count, figures, or response-letter references.
Provide:
If the venue instructions are not available or current, the venue-compliance portion cannot pass.
List every intended file with filename, role, version, modification date, and checksum where possible. Identify the authoritative manuscript. Exclude working notes, tracked-change files, personal data, hidden drafts, and unrelated attachments unless required.
Check the latest status and evidence for:
A prior PASS is invalidated if the relevant content changed afterward. Record which checks must be rerun.
Create a requirement matrix covering format, genre, length, language, file type, title page, abstract, keywords, headings, notes, references, figures, tables, supplementary material, anonymization, declarations, and submission-system fields.
Use current official instructions. Do not infer requirements from another journal, an old author template, or a third-party blog.
Check title, author order, affiliations, corresponding author, ORCID, funding, acknowledgments, and version consistency. Ensure abstract, keywords, headings, tables, figures, appendices, notes, and references belong to the same manuscript version.
Confirm that response-letter page and line references match the final revised file.
For blinded review, inspect title page, manuscript text, acknowledgments, self-citations, file properties, comments, tracked changes, embedded paths, image metadata, supplementary files, repository links, and filenames. Do not remove information required by the venue; follow its blinding policy.
Check that personal, confidential, student, participant, peer-review, or archival data are not exposed improperly.
Confirm that no blocking citation issue remains and that revisions did not create new orphan references. Check permissions or fair-use documentation for images, tables, long quotations, translated material, archival reproductions, and third-party content as required.
This skill records permission status; it does not provide legal advice.
Check required statements for funding, conflicts, ethics, consent, data availability, author contributions, originality, prior publication, preprints, and AI assistance. The disclosure must reflect actual use and the venue's policy. Do not invent compliance or conceal prohibited use.
Inspect page numbers, line numbers, fonts, margins, headings, cross-references, table and figure numbering, captions, alternative text where required, equation and symbol rendering, hyperlinks, bibliography formatting, and file opening. Check that no placeholder, comment, broken field, or unresolved marker remains.
Search explicitly for markers such as:
TODO
TBD
[CITATION NEEDED]
[AUTHOR DECISION REQUIRED]
XXX
placeholder
Do not remove an unresolved marker merely to pass the gate; resolve or report it.
Compare the final package with the version that passed prior review. Record post-review changes. If substantive claims, quotations, citations, terminology, or structure changed, route back to the relevant skill before deciding readiness.
Use:
Return PASS only when all mandatory requirements within scope are evidenced, no blocking issue remains, and the exact package has been checked. CONDITIONAL PASS is allowed only when the package may proceed under a clearly stated external condition that does not invalidate the current scholarly claims. Return FAIL for missing audits, unresolved citations, false revision claims, privacy exposure, missing declarations, requirement mismatch, or version inconsistency.
Stop and fail or request action when:
PASS despite a blocker.Completion requires:
Do not claim compliance with instructions that were not checked. Do not invent ethics approval, permission, funding, author consent, ORCID, word count, AI disclosure, or rights status. Do not report a file as inspected when only its filename is known. Do not turn missing information into “not applicable” without researcher confirmation.
A FAIL is correct when evidence is missing. The purpose of this skill is not to make every package pass.
Use templates/submission-gate.md and include:
Gate: Submission Verification
Status: PASS | CONDITIONAL PASS | FAIL
Evidence checked:
Blocking issues:
Non-blocking risks:
Researcher decisions required:
External authority required:
Required next action:
Verified package identifier:
Next skill:
Verify the exact files in this submission folder against the current journal instructions and prior audit reports. Fail the gate if the manuscript changed after citation audit or if any required disclosure is unknown.
Mark this submission ready now. I do not have the final files or journal instructions, but the prose looks polished.
The bad invocation mistakes appearance for verified readiness and MUST receive FAIL.
auditing-citations when references changed or remain unresolved.checking-terminology-consistency after late conceptual edits.reviewing-manuscript after substantive changes.responding-to-peer-review for mismatch between revision letter and manuscript.using-humanities-superpowers to route any failed gate.Submission systems, policies, legal requirements, and ethical rules vary and can change. This skill depends on current official instructions and accurate researcher-supplied information. It cannot provide legal advice, guarantee upload success, or guarantee editorial acceptance. The final author remains responsible for every submitted file and declaration.