CuiMuxuan Language Style Review
Use this skill to audit scholarly wording and return scored findings, localized issues, candidate rewrites, and a handoff queue. It does not write the manuscript, update sentence status, or maintain revision state.
Boundaries
Do:
- Review language at manuscript, chapter, section, paragraph, sentence, figure/table text, or citation-sentence level.
- Score clarity, academic expression, terminology, and residue/mechanical-pattern risk.
- Locate problems by object id or sentence when ids are available.
- Provide candidate rewrites as suggestions only.
- Explain why accepted professional terms or proper nouns should remain unchanged.
- Create candidate project-standard items when the user asks to record a preference.
- Distinguish between正文机理段 and摘要/引言/过渡段 when judging connector density, conceptual compression, and figure narration style.
Do not:
- Update the latest draft, object library, sentence pass/fail state, revision count, or round directory.
- Write to project supplemental review standards.
- Perform full manuscript quality or benchmark readiness review; route to
$post-manuscript-benchmark-review. - Perform formal sentence-level revision management; route to
$revision-control. - Final-polish stable text as the primary task; route accepted rewrite execution to
$academic-de-ai-polishingwhen appropriate. - Verify DOI, title, citation authenticity, or evidence sufficiency as final authority.
Core Rules
- Return review output, not official modifications.
- Respect user-specified disliked words, phrases, sentence rhythm, and translation concerns as high-priority signals.
- Keep field-specific terms if they are accepted professional terminology; explain the reason instead of rewriting them away.
- Flag operation records, prompt traces, project-management traces, TODOs, and file workflow residue in manuscript prose.
- Separate language problems from evidence, structure, citation-identity, or manuscript-readiness problems.
- When a problem implies structural rewriting, missing literature, or object-state changes, create a handoff item for
$revision-control. - Never add a project rule directly; produce
candidate_rulesfor$revision-controlto confirm with the user.
Workflow
- Identify scope, available object ids, manuscript language, field, target style, and any project standards path.
- Use review-workflow.md to choose independent, orchestrated, or revision-control handoff mode.
- Use scoring-and-output-schema.md for four-dimension scoring, issue tables, accepted-term notes, candidate rewrites, and handoff queues.
- Use project-standards-handling.md when project supplemental standards, terminology lists, problem-word lists, or user preferences are available.
- If benchmark-quality judgment is requested, route the quality portion to
$post-manuscript-benchmark-reviewbefore language review. - If official modification is requested, send the localized task queue to
$revision-control.
Output Contract
Return:
- review scope and source limits;
- project standards used, if any;
- four dimension scores to one decimal place;
- main issues;
- sentence/object-level issue table;
- accepted terms/proper nouns that should remain;
- candidate rewrites marked as non-final;
- suggested
$revision-controltask queue; candidate_ruleswhen the user asks to record a preference.
Reference
Read review-workflow.md for activation modes, sequencing with benchmark review, and handoff boundaries.
Read scoring-and-output-schema.md before producing a formal report.
Read project-standards-handling.md before using or proposing project supplemental standards.
Read language-style-review-schema.md when another skill must consume the review report.