# Jacs Workflow > Use when deciding which jacs-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS) manuscript from scope check through revision. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills. - Skill: `thedixitjain/jacs-workflow` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add thedixitjain/jacs-workflow` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/thedixitjain/jacs-workflow/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Research & Search - Author: thedixitjain (https://skillmd.com/u/thedixitjain) - Updated: 2026-09-08 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/thedixitjain/jacs-workflow --- # JACS Workflow Router (jacs-workflow) ## Overview This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill; it tells you **which jacs-* skill to use for your current stage** of a JACS manuscript. Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, the target is the **Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS)** — a premier, broad-scope ACS chemistry journal. The bar is a significant, rigorously characterized chemical advance of broad interest, with claims fully supported by data and controls. ## When to trigger - "What should I do next?" on a chemistry manuscript - A draft arrives and you must find the current bottleneck (story, data, format) - Work is bouncing between synthesis, characterization, figures, and writing - Referee reports arrived and you need to switch into response/revision mode ## Routing table | Current symptom | Next skill | |-----------------|------------| | Unsure whether the advance is broad/significant enough for JACS vs a specialized ACS journal | `jacs-scope-fit` | | Have results but the "so what" / chemical advance is not sharp | `jacs-results-framing` | | Synthesis or characterization may be incomplete (purity, NMR, HRMS, X-ray, controls) | `jacs-methods` | | Schemes/spectra/structures don't look like ACS style or don't carry the story | `jacs-figures` | | Supporting Information missing procedures, spectra copies, CIFs, or CCDC numbers | `jacs-supplementary` | | Prose is vague, over-claimed, or not in ACS house style | `jacs-writing-style` | | Unsure whether to write an Article or a Communication / over length | `jacs-length-management` | | Need a cover letter stating the advance and fit | `jacs-cover-letter` | | Ready to submit; need the Paragon Plus preflight checklist | `jacs-submission` | | Suggesting/excluding reviewers, anticipating referee objections | `jacs-referee-strategy` | | Decision letter / referee reports arrived; need a response strategy | `jacs-revision` | ## Default order 1. `jacs-scope-fit` — confirm broad interest and the right ACS venue/format 2. `jacs-results-framing` — pin the chemical advance and its significance 3. `jacs-methods` — synthesis + full characterization and control/mechanism rigor 4. `jacs-figures` — schemes, spectra, structures, mechanism figures (ACS style) 5. `jacs-supplementary` — build the SI (procedures, data, spectra, CIFs/CCDC) 6. `jacs-writing-style` — ACS house style and claim discipline 7. `jacs-length-management` — Article vs Communication; meet ACS format norms 8. `jacs-cover-letter` — advance + fit statement to the editor 9. `jacs-submission` — Paragon Plus preflight 10. `jacs-referee-strategy` — reviewer suggestions + objection pre-empting 11. `jacs-revision` — after the decision letter > `jacs-writing-style` and `jacs-length-management` are **late-stage polish** — > do not run them before the data and the advance are solid. ## Decision shortcuts - "Is this big enough for JACS?" → `jacs-scope-fit` - "I have data but no headline" → `jacs-results-framing` - "A reviewer could say my new compound isn't fully characterized" → `jacs-methods` - "My mechanism is asserted, not tested" → `jacs-methods` (controls/kinetics/labeling) - "My scheme is ugly / spectra unreadable" → `jacs-figures` - "Where do the CIFs and FID copies go?" → `jacs-supplementary` - "Communication or Article?" → `jacs-length-management` - "Submitting tomorrow" → `jacs-submission` - "Got three referee reports" → `jacs-revision` ## Submission package tree Before running `jacs-submission`, the working directory should already look like this — each item maps to the skill that produces it. A missing file tells you which stage was skipped. ```text jacs-manuscript/ ├── manuscript.docx # main text, ACS house style → jacs-writing-style │ # type decided (Article vs Comm.) → jacs-length-management ├── figures/ │ ├── scheme-1.tif # reaction scheme, ACS style → jacs-figures │ ├── figure-1.tif # headline result figure → jacs-figures │ └── toc-graphic.tif # table-of-contents graphic → jacs-figures ├── supporting-information/ │ ├── SI.pdf # procedures + characterization → jacs-supplementary │ │ # (purity, NMR, HRMS for new compounds → jacs-methods) │ ├── spectra/ # copies of NMR spectra → jacs-supplementary │ └── crystallography/ # CIFs + CCDC deposition numbers → jacs-supplementary ├── cover-letter.pdf # advance + broad-interest fit → jacs-cover-letter └── reviewers.txt # suggested / excluded reviewers → jacs-referee-strategy # upload target: ACS Paragon Plus → jacs-submission ``` ## Differences vs. specialized ACS journal stacks If the work is narrow in scope (e.g., a single subfield advance with limited cross-chemistry interest), a specialized ACS journal (*Org. Lett.*, *Inorg. Chem.*, *Chem. Mater.*, *ACS Catal.*, *J. Org. Chem.*, etc.) may fit better. `jacs-scope-fit` makes that call explicit. JACS rewards advances that matter **across chemistry**, not only within one community. ## Anti-patterns - **Do not** skip `jacs-scope-fit` — editors triage on broad interest first. - **Do not** let `jacs-figures` polish schemes before the characterization (`jacs-methods`) is complete. - **Do not** let `jacs-revision` draft a response before you have actually done the new experiments/edits. --- **Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Journal-of-the-American-Chemical-Society-Skills/skills/jacs-workflow/SKILL.md`