Results for “prose-review”

通用跨模型审查：Review LLM 对任意研究制品进行独立评审，输出结构化评分、wiki 实体映射与改进建议

Orients researchers to an unfamiliar academic field by searching Consensus, building a strategic search plan with PICO or other frameworks, and synthesizing findings into a formatted Word document.

Provides nine skills for Nature-journal-family academic publishing, covering figure creation, prose polishing, manuscript writing, citation formatting, data availability statements, paper reading, reviewer responses, paper-to-PPT conversion, and academic search via an MCP server.

多源 novelty 验证：WebSearch + Semantic Scholar + wiki + Review LLM cross-verify，输出 novelty 评分与建议

Review docs, tool output, skills, and memory candidates for prompt-injection risk.

Turn a PR, diff, merge request, or patch stack into one evidence-first review brief with severity, missing-proof checks, and route-outs.

Call a DeepSeek-backed OpenCode agent as a separate critique, writing, or revision agent from Codex. Use when Codex needs to delegate adversarial research critique, novelty skepticism, method review, manuscript prose, LaTeX section drafting, academic text revision, or paper-writing feedback loops to DeepSeek.

Applies Han's shared Human-Readable Output Standard to a target you already have — a file on disk, text pasted into the prompt, or a draft already produced in the conversation — by dispatching the readability-editor to rewrite its prose so the main point comes first, headings are descriptive, each paragraph carries one idea, and sentences stay short and active, while preserving every fact. Use when you want to make a document or draft readable, edit or polish prose for readability, clean up writing, tighten wording, or re-apply the readability standard to something already written. Rewrites prose only, leaving code, diagrams, and citation identifiers unchanged. Does not write new feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not restructure code or review it — use refactor to restructure code and code-review to audit it. Does not judge the underlying work or raise findings; it only rewrites the writing.