skills.rest
biomaps-infra
biomaps-infraOFFICIAL
Explore all skills by this author →
GitHub

workflow-peer-review

Guide structured peer review of manuscripts and grant proposals.

Updated Mar 13, 2026
Search Tags:#scientific writing#grant review#peer review#research integrity#manuscript evaluation#reporting standards
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/biomaps-infra/blender-opencode --skill workflow-peer-review
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: workflow-peer-review
Source: https://github.com/biomaps-infra/blender-opencode/tree/main/.opencode/skills/workflow-peer-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/biomaps-infra/blender-opencode --skill workflow-peer-review

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill provides a structured, systematic approach to evaluating scientific manuscripts and grant proposals, ensuring thoroughness, rigor, and constructive feedback.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Comprehensive Evaluation: Assesses methodology, statistics, reproducibility, ethics, and reporting standards.
  • Structured Feedback: Guides users in generating detailed, actionable review reports.
  • Use Case: A journal editor can use this Skill to guide a reviewer in evaluating a submitted manuscript, ensuring all critical aspects are covered and feedback is consistent and high-quality.

Quick Start

Use the workflow-peer-review skill to evaluate the attached manuscript draft, focusing on statistical validity and reporting standards.

Frequently Asked Questions about workflow-peer-review

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I conduct a structured peer review of a scientific manuscript?▼

Conduct structured peer review using a systematic checklist that evaluates scientific manuscript methodology, statistical rigor, reproducibility, and ethics to generate detailed, actionable feedback reports.

How do I evaluate a grant proposal for research integrity and reporting standards?▼

Evaluate grant proposals by systematically checking methodology, statistical validity, and reproducibility using structured workflows that assess reporting standards and guide constructive feedback generation.

What reporting standards does the peer review process check against?▼

The peer review process checks scientific manuscripts and grant proposals against established reporting standards like CONSORT and STROBE to ensure thoroughness, rigor, and adherence to reporting guidelines.

Can I use this systematic checklist for presentation reviews as well as manuscripts?▼

Yes, this systematic checklist supports presentation reviews alongside standard manuscript and grant evaluation through specific workflows designed to assess scientific presentations.

What is the best way to assess statistical validity during manuscript evaluation?▼

Assess statistical validity during manuscript evaluation using a structured, systematic approach that guides reviewers through checking statistical rigor, reproducibility, and methodology to ensure comprehensive coverage.

Related Skills

Explore More Education & Research Skills→
youyinnnyouyinnn
1

peer-review

Evaluate scientific manuscripts and grant proposals using structured review criteria.

Community
Advanced
00PrabalK0000PrabalK00
1

peer-review-response-writer

Draft point-by-point responses to reviewer comments with evidence and rebuttal structure.

Community
Advanced
seabbsseabbs
7

academic-writing-standards

Enforce academic writing standards across manuscript sections and citations.

Community
Advanced
EmaRimoldiEmaRimoldi

paper-quality-check

Audit research papers across eight quality dimensions and generate a structured report.

Community
Advanced