What problem does it solve? Authors lack access to realistic pre-submission peer review, so methodological flaws, literature gaps, and weak arguments are only discovered after journal submission. This Skill simulates a complete journal review process with five independent reviewer personas, delivering structured feedback before real submission. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Multi-Perspective Review Panel: Dynamically configures an Editor-in-Chief, three peer reviewers (methodology, domain, cross-disciplinary), and a Devil's Advocate based on the paper's field, producing five independent reports plus an Editorial Decision Letter and prioritized Revision Roadmap. - Six Operational Modes: Full review, re-review (revision verification with traceability matrix), quick assessment, methodology-focus, Socratic guided review, and calibration mode that measures reviewer FNR/FPR against a user-supplied gold set. - Use Case: A researcher finishing a manuscript on higher education policy pastes the paper and receives five reviewer reports from distinct perspectives, a consolidated editorial decision, and a revision checklist that feeds directly into a paper-revision workflow. ## Quick Start Ask the assistant to review your paper by pasting the manuscript text or providing the file, optionally specifying a mode such as quick, methodology-focus, or re-review.
