skills.rest
Aperivue
AperivueOFFICIAL
Explore all skills by this author →
WebsiteGitHub

self-review

Generate anticipated reviewer comments with severity framing for manuscript submissions.

243|60|Updated Apr 6, 2026
Search Tags:#quality-assurance#peer-review#self-review#manuscripts#research-workflow#pre-submission
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill self-review-aperivue
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: self-review
Source: https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills/tree/main/skills/self-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill self-review-aperivue

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Pre-submission self-review helps researchers anticipate reviewer comments by applying the same critical lens used in peer review across medical journals. It systematically flags potential issues across 10 evaluation categories so authors can strengthen their manuscript before submission.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Applies a structured 10-category reviewer framework to generate a concise set of anticipated major and minor comments with severity framing.
  • Outputs a JSON block for machine parsing and a markdown self-review report that guides revision workflow (including optional R0 numbering for /revise pipelines).
  • Facilitates phase-based workflows (intake, analysis, reporting) and provides explicit, actionable fixes that leverage existing data.

Quick Start

Submit your manuscript to generate a self-review report with actionable anticipated comments and a machine-readable JSON block.

Frequently Asked Questions about self-review

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I anticipate peer reviewer comments for a research manuscript before submission?▼

Pre-submission self-review applies a 10-category reviewer lens to your manuscript to identify and articulate anticipated major and minor reviewer comments with severity framing before journal submission.

What is the best way to apply a structured peer review framework to my own research work?▼

Applying a structured peer review framework involves evaluating your manuscript across 10 evaluation categories to flag potential issues, producing a markdown self-review report that guides your revision workflow with explicit fixes.

Can I generate a machine-readable JSON report of anticipated manuscript issues for my research workflow?▼

Yes, manuscript self-review generates a machine-readable JSON block containing anticipated major and minor comments alongside a markdown report, enabling automated parsing within your pre-submission research workflow.

Does pre-submission self-review support numbering for automated manuscript revision pipelines?▼

Yes, pre-submission self-review provides optional R0 numbering for identified issues within the generated markdown report, facilitating direct integration with automated /revise revision workflows.

What limitations exist when using a 10-category reviewer lens for manuscript self-evaluation?▼

The 10-category reviewer lens is specifically calibrated for medical journal peer review standards, meaning its anticipated comments and severity framing may not fully align with non-medical research publication requirements.

Related Skills

Explore More Education & Research Skills→
shaitamam-80shaitamam-80

manuscript-writer

Assemble systematic review outputs into PRISMA 2020-compliant manuscript sections.

Community
Advanced
Bhavya-DhootBhavya-Dhoot

aras-peer-reviewer

Automate structured peer review of LaTeX manuscripts into JSON critiques.

Community
Advanced
notquenotque
415

workflow

Execute structured multi-phase agent workflows with evidence-based gates.

Community
Advanced
WanLanglinWanLanglin

peer-review

Evaluate scientific manuscripts using checklist-guided criteria aligned with CONSORT, STROBE, and PRISMA.

Community
Advanced