academic-peer-reviewer

To perform a structured peer review, load your draft and protocol to trigger a gate-based workflow that checks completeness, critiques logical flaws, and generates a structured review file.

Checking a research paper for logical gaps and unsupported claims requires a gate-based critique workflow that identifies overclaims, verifies asset alignment, and outputs actionable feedback in a review report.

Automating manuscript formatting checks involves loading the draft contents and protocol to verify figure and table presence, ensuring alignment before generating a structured critique report.

This peer review workflow requires Python 3.8 or higher to run, utilizing a gate-based critique system that processes manuscripts and outputs a markdown review file without requiring external dependencies.

Yes, you can use this manuscript critique tool for early-stage drafts and submitted papers across disciplines to detect logical flaws, formatting issues, and sensitive data leakage.

Limitations include relying on the provided protocol for completeness verification, requiring manual loading of draft contents, and focusing strictly on logical gaps and formatting rather than content generation.