domains / families / research / peer-review

peer-review

combined

Prepares evidence-bounded, constructive peer-review drafts and structured manuscript assessments. Supports authorized review of scientific manuscripts, protocols, preprints, or research proposals; reporting-guideline selection; claim–evidence checks; methods, statistics, reproducibility, ethics, figure/table, and citation critique; or revision-response planning. Conduct professional peer reviews for papers or theses, providing structured evaluations and improvement suggestions; use when you need a pre-submission assessment, an internal review, or academic quality control.

When to use

• **Pre-submission manuscript check**: Before submitting to a journal/conference to identify major risks and revision priorities.
• **Internal lab/group review**: For advisor or team quality control prior to external dissemination.
• **Thesis/dissertation evaluation**: To assess academic rigor, structure, and defensibility before committee review.
• **Revision planning after feedback**: To translate reviewer/editor comments into an actionable improvement roadmap.
• **Quality assurance for research outputs**: To ensure methods, reporting, and conclusions meet disciplinary standards.
• Conducting peer review of scientific manuscripts for journals
• Evaluating grant proposals and research applications
• Assessing methodology and experimental design rigor

When not to use

• unauthorized review of unpublished content
• sending unpublished content to external services
• uploading confidential content to public models or services
• reusing content for training or benchmarking
• fabricating manuscript details or review findings
• announcing editorial decisions
• automated coverage or lint results as peer review

Skill page

Conflict

The copies overlap on the core task of structured scientific peer review, but they disagree on the procedure and contain material steps the others lack. The K-Dense-AI copy is the only one that enforces a mandatory safety boundary, authorization gate, and local-only processing before reading unpublished content, and it provides specific bundled CLI scripts for intake validation and reporting-guideline selection. The Vibe-Skills and brycewang-stanford copies are nearly identical to each other and add a 'Visual Enhancement' step requiring the generation of scientific schematics, which the K-Dense copy explicitly forbids (no image pipelines). The aipoch copy provides a distinct, simpler workflow focused on pre-submission checks and a specific 'Major vs. Minor' issue triage template that the others do not use. Crowning one copy would hide the safety-critical constraints of the first or the visual/template-specific steps of the others.