What problem does it solve? Authors submitting to high-impact journals often cannot anticipate how referees will attack novelty, significance, or technical soundness. This Skill simulates a Nature-style pre-submission peer review so weaknesses surface before the real submission. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Mutually blind multi-reviewer simulation: Produces three independent reviewer reports in isolated contexts with preassigned emphasis briefs, then generates a cross-review synthesis only after all reports are frozen. - Evidence-grounded tiered concerns: Classifies every issue as Major Concern or Minor Comment with stable IDs, claim pointers, evidence pointers, blocking flags, and resolution tests, without inventing problems to fill quotas. - Domain-specific review gates: Applies claim-dependent stress tests for chemistry, engineering, materials, atmospheric science, climate ecology, hydrology, and remote sensing manuscripts. - Use Case: Before submitting a manuscript, ask for three reviewer reports and a synthesis to identify blocking technical failings, unsupported novelty claims, and readability barriers for nonspecialist readers. ## Quick Start Use the nature-reviewer skill to review my attached manuscript like a Nature referee and give me three reviewer reports plus a synthesis.
