review

name	review
description	Critique a manuscript, talk, or any written artifact
personas	Skeptic, Methodologist, Visionary, Newcomer, Connector

Critique this written work: $ARGUMENTS

Phase 1 (parallel) — use the Semantic Scholar MCP tool (low rate limits) to find and verify papers:

• Skeptic: search for related and competing work
• Connector: search for complementary work in adjacent fields

Phase 2 (depends on Phase 1):

• Methodologist: evaluate soundness and generalizability
• Visionary: assess impact and venue fit — is the framing big enough?
• Newcomer: flag clarity issues, jargon, and accessibility. Walk through section by section — if you get lost, say where and why.

Phase 3 (depends on Phase 2):

• All: debate. Is this ready? What's the weakest part? Produce structured feedback organized by dimension.