submission-engine

name	submission-engine
description	Activate when the user wants to prepare a paper for submission to a specific venue. Handles venue-specific formatting validation, anonymization checks for double-blind review, cover letter generation, suggested reviewer identification, and submission checklist completion. Produces a submission-ready package.

Orchestration Log: When this skill is activated, append a log entry to outputs/orchestration_log.md:

### Skill Activation: Submission Engine
**Timestamp:** [current date/time]
**Actor:** AI Agent (submission-engine)
**Input:** Target venue: [venue], paper: [paper.tex / draft.md]
**Output:** Submission package prepared: cover letter, anonymization report, checklist

Submission Engine

Core Principle

A paper is only as good as its submission package. Many strong papers receive desk rejections because of anonymization failures, formatting errors, or missing cover letters. This engine ensures that the transition from "paper is ready" to "paper is submitted" is error-free and complete.

When to Activate

• User says "prepare submission", "submit to [venue]", "submission package"
• User says "anonymize", "blind review", "double-blind check"
• User says "cover letter", "suggested reviewers", "submission checklist"
• After Phase 6 (LaTeX export) when the paper is ready for submission
• User runs /prepare-submission

Prerequisites

• latex/paper.tex exists and compiles
• latex/paper.pdf exists
• Target venue is specified (or can be inferred from framing.md)

---

Step 1: IDENTIFY Target Venue & Load Requirements

Venue Database

For common IS/CS venues, apply known formatting requirements:

Venue	Type	Page Limit	Format	Blind	Template
ICIS	Conference	17 pages	AIS template	Double-blind	AIS Electronic Library
ECIS	Conference	15 pages (research) / 12 (short)	AIS template	Double-blind	AIS Electronic Library
HICSS	Conference	10 pages	IEEE format	Single-blind	IEEE
WI	Conference	12 pages	Springer LNBIP	Double-blind	Springer
AMCIS	Conference	10 pages	AIS template	Double-blind	AIS Electronic Library
MISQ	Journal	No strict limit (~40-60 pages)	MISQ style	Double-blind	MISQ website
ISR	Journal	No strict limit (~30-50 pages)	INFORMS style	Double-blind	PubsOnline
EJIS	Journal	~8000-10000 words	Taylor & Francis	Double-blind	T&F website
BISE	Journal	~8000-10000 words	Springer	Double-blind	Springer
JIT	Journal	~8000-10000 words	Sage	Double-blind	Sage

If venue is not in the database:

1. Search web for "[venue name] submission guidelines" / "author guidelines"
2. Extract: page limit, format, blind review policy, template requirements
3. Document in submission package

Venue-Specific Checks

For the identified venue, create a checklist of formatting requirements:

• Page/word limit
• Font and spacing requirements
• Reference style (APA, IEEE, ACM, etc.)
• Abstract word limit
• Keywords required?
• Author info format
• Appendix rules
• Figure/table formatting rules

---

Step 2: ANONYMIZATION CHECK (for Double-Blind)

What to Check

Scan paper.tex for any element that could reveal author identity:

Check	What to Find	How to Fix
Author names	\author{}, author names in text	Remove or replace with "Author"
Self-citations	"we previously showed (OurName, 2023)" or "in our prior work"	Replace with "(Author, Year)" or rephrase
Institutional references	University names, lab names, company names	Anonymize: "[Anonymous University]"
Acknowledgments	\section*{Acknowledgments} with grant numbers, names	Remove entirely or anonymize
URLs/links	GitHub repos, project websites, personal pages	Remove or anonymize
File metadata	PDF properties (author field in LaTeX)	Check \hypersetup{pdfauthor=...}
Track changes	Comment markers with author names	Remove % [R3: ... per AuthorName]
Funding info	Grant numbers linked to specific PIs	Remove or generalize
Supplementary material	Links to identifiable repositories	Use anonymous sharing (e.g., anonymous GitHub)

Self-Citation Detection

Self-citations are the #1 anonymization failure. Scan for:

1. Explicit self-refs: Search for all author names from \author{} in citation keys and text
2. Implicit self-refs: Patterns like:
   • "In our previous work" / "In prior work, we" / "We have shown"
   • "Building on [OurPaper]" where OurPaper is by any of the authors
   • "As Author1 and Author2 (Year) demonstrated" where Author1/2 are paper authors
3. Citation key patterns: Check if any \citep{}/\citet{} keys contain author last names that match paper authors

Fix Strategy

For each finding:

• Self-citations (critical): Replace with "(Author, Year)" and add to a separate "self-citations" list that can be restored after acceptance
• Author info: Create a separate paper_deanonymized.tex that preserves the original author information
• Acknowledgments: Move to a acknowledgments_hidden.tex file for post-acceptance restoration

Output

## Anonymization Report

**Status:** [PASS / FAIL — N issues found]

### Critical Issues (must fix before submission)
- [ ] Line [N]: Self-citation detected: \citep{blask2024} — author name matches paper author
- [ ] Line [N]: "In our previous work (Blask & Funk, 2023)" — explicit self-reference

### Warnings (review recommended)
- [ ] Line [N]: Acknowledgments section contains personal names
- [ ] Line [N]: GitHub URL in footnote may be identifiable

### Passed Checks
- [x] No author names in \author{} (anonymized version)
- [x] PDF metadata clean (pdfauthor field empty)
- [x] No institutional affiliations in text body

---

Step 3: GENERATE Cover Letter

Template

# Cover Letter

**To:** [Editor-in-Chief / Program Chairs]
**From:** [Corresponding Author]
**Date:** [Date]
**Re:** Submission of "[Paper Title]" to [Venue]

---

Dear [Editor-in-Chief / Program Chairs / Editorial Board],

We are pleased to submit our manuscript entitled "[Paper Title]" for
consideration [for publication in / at] [Venue Name].

**Summary:** [2-3 sentences summarizing the paper's contribution. What problem
does it address? What does it find? Why does it matter?]

**Relevance to [Venue]:** [2-3 sentences explaining why this paper fits the
venue's scope, mission, or current call for papers. Reference specific tracks
or special issues if applicable.]

**Contribution:** This paper makes [N] contributions to the [field] literature:
(1) [contribution 1], (2) [contribution 2], [and (3) contribution 3].

**Method:** [1 sentence on methodology and key data/evidence.]

[**Special issue / track:** If applicable: "We submit this paper for
consideration in the [special issue name / track name] because [fit]."]

**Declarations:**
- This manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under
  consideration at another journal or conference.
- All authors have approved the manuscript and agree to its submission.
- [If applicable: Ethics approval was obtained from [institution] (Ref: [number]).]
- [If applicable: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.]

**Suggested Reviewers:** [See Step 4 — include if venue requests/allows this.]

We look forward to your consideration.

Sincerely,
[Corresponding Author Name]
[Affiliation]
[Email]

Customization

• Journal submission: More formal, mention special issues, discuss fit with journal scope
• Conference submission: Shorter, mention track, discuss timeliness of contribution
• R&R resubmission: Replace with revision cover letter (different structure — summarize changes, reference review-engine output)

Save as submission/cover_letter.md (and optionally submission/cover_letter.pdf).

---

Step 4: SUGGEST Reviewers

Strategy

Identify potential reviewers from the paper's own reference list:

1. Extract most-cited authors from references.bib:

   • Count how many times each author appears across all references
   • Rank by frequency + citation count of their papers

2. Filter for appropriateness:

   • Remove co-authors of any paper author (conflict of interest)
   • Remove anyone cited only once (may not be relevant enough)
   • Remove authors from the same institution as paper authors

3. Research each candidate:

   • Current affiliation (via OpenAlex author search)
   • Recent publications (to confirm they're active in the field)
   • Email (from recent publications if available)

4. Select 3-5 suggested reviewers with justification

Output

## Suggested Reviewers

| # | Name | Affiliation | Expertise | Why Suitable | Papers Cited |
|---|------|-------------|-----------|-------------|-------------|
| 1 | [Name] | [University] | [Area] | [1-sentence] | [N] papers cited in our manuscript |
| 2 | [Name] | [University] | [Area] | [1-sentence] | [N] papers cited |
| 3 | [Name] | [University] | [Area] | [1-sentence] | [N] papers cited |

### Excluded (Conflicts of Interest)
- [Name] — co-author of [paper author] on [paper]
- [Name] — same institution as [paper author]

Save as submission/suggested_reviewers.md.

---

Step 5: FORMATTING VALIDATION

Automated Checks

Run these checks on paper.tex / paper.pdf:

Check	Target	How
Page count	Within venue limit	Count pages in PDF
Word count	Within venue limit (if applicable)	texcount paper.tex or approximate
Abstract length	Within venue limit (typically 150-250 words)	Count words in abstract
Reference style	Matches venue requirements	Check citation format (APA, IEEE, etc.)
Figure quality	Minimum 300 DPI, readable at print size	Check figure files
Table formatting	Consistent style, no vertical lines (booktabs)	Scan for \hline vs \toprule
Section numbering	Correct and complete	Parse \section{} hierarchy
Keywords	Present if required	Check for \keywords{} or equivalent
Running head	Present if required	Check \pagestyle configuration
Line numbers	Present if required for review	Check \linenumbers

Output

## Formatting Validation Report

**Target venue:** [Venue]
**Status:** [PASS / N issues found]

| Check | Required | Actual | Status |
|-------|----------|--------|--------|
| Pages | max 17 | 15 | PASS |
| Abstract | 150-250 words | 218 words | PASS |
| References | APA 7 | APA 7 | PASS |
| Keywords | Required | 5 keywords present | PASS |
| Anonymized | Yes (double-blind) | Yes | PASS |
| Figure resolution | 300 DPI | fig1: 300, fig2: 150 | WARN — fig2 low res |

---

Step 6: SUBMISSION CHECKLIST

Final Checklist

Generate a comprehensive submission checklist tailored to the venue:

## Submission Checklist — [Venue]

### Manuscript
- [ ] Paper compiles without errors (0 errors, 0 undefined references)
- [ ] Within page/word limit ([N] pages / [N] words — limit: [N])
- [ ] Abstract within word limit ([N] words — limit: [N])
- [ ] Abstract passes agent-readability check (domain named, RQ explicit, method + data source named, ≥1 concrete finding, no deferred meaning — see writing-engine Agent-Readability Rules)
- [ ] Keywords included (if required)
- [ ] All [CITE], [DATA], [TODO] placeholders resolved
- [ ] All figures referenced in text and present in figures/
- [ ] All tables referenced in text
- [ ] Bibliography complete (all \citep/\citet resolved)
- [ ] Consistent formatting throughout

### Anonymization (Double-Blind)
- [ ] Author names removed from manuscript
- [ ] Self-citations anonymized
- [ ] Institutional references removed
- [ ] Acknowledgments removed or anonymized
- [ ] PDF metadata cleaned (no author in properties)
- [ ] URLs/links to identifiable resources removed

### Submission Files
- [ ] Manuscript PDF (anonymized)
- [ ] Source files (.tex, .bib, .sty, figures/) if required
- [ ] Cover letter
- [ ] Supplementary materials (if any)
- [ ] Author information form (if required, separate from manuscript)
- [ ] Suggested reviewers list (if requested)
- [ ] Copyright/originality declaration (if required)
- [ ] Ethics statement (if applicable)

### Final Verification
- [ ] All co-authors have reviewed and approved the manuscript
- [ ] Not under review at another venue
- [ ] Submission deadline confirmed: [date]
- [ ] Submission portal accessed: [URL]

Save as submission/submission_checklist.md.

---

Step 7: COMPILE Submission Package

Output Directory Structure

submission/
├── paper_anonymous.tex     ← anonymized LaTeX source
├── paper_anonymous.pdf     ← anonymized compiled PDF
├── paper_deanonymized.tex  ← full version (for records)
├── cover_letter.md         ← cover letter
├── suggested_reviewers.md  ← reviewer suggestions
├── anonymization_report.md ← anonymization check results
├── formatting_report.md    ← formatting validation results
├── submission_checklist.md ← final checklist
└── self_citations.md       ← list of anonymized self-citations (for post-acceptance)

Checkpoint

📦 SUBMISSION PACKAGE READY
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Target venue: [Venue Name]
Paper: "[Title]" — [N] pages, [N] words

Anonymization: [PASS / N issues to fix]
Formatting:    [PASS / N issues to fix]
Cover letter:  Generated
Reviewers:     [N] suggested

📁 Saved: submission/

✅ Checklist: [N]/[N] items completed
⚠️  Open items: [list any remaining items]

→ Review the checklist, then submit at [venue submission URL].

---

Error Recovery

• Venue not recognized: Ask the user for submission guidelines URL, then extract requirements via WebFetch
• Anonymization FAIL: Present all issues. Do NOT auto-fix without user approval (some self-citations may be intentional)
• Over page limit: Report by how many pages. Suggest specific sections to shorten. Do NOT auto-cut
• LaTeX compilation fails after anonymization: Diff the anonymized version against the original to find the break

---

Integration

Scenario	Integration
After Phase 6	Natural next step — prepare for submission
After /review-paper + /respond-reviewers	Submit the revised version
R&R resubmission	Different cover letter template (revision letter)
Writing-engine	Shorten sections if over page limit
Verification-engine	Verify citations before submission