What problem does it solve? Authors lack access to realistic pre-submission peer review, so weaknesses in methodology, argumentation, and journal fit surface only after formal submission. This Skill simulates a complete journal review process with multiple role-separated reviewer personas, delivering structured critique and an editorial decision before the real submission. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Multi-Perspective Review Panel: Runs a five-seat panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer, Methodology, Domain, Perspective, and Devil's Advocate reviewers) with field-specific personas configured automatically from the paper's discipline. - Six Operational Modes: Supports full review, re-review (revision verification), quick assessment, methodology-focus, Socratic guided review, and calibration modes for measuring reviewer decision-error profiles. - Editorial Synthesis: Consolidates all reviewer reports into an Editorial Decision Letter and an immutable Revision Roadmap, with visible adjudication of Devil's Advocate critical findings. - Use Case: A researcher pastes a draft manuscript and receives five independent review reports plus an editorial decision and revision roadmap, then uses re-review mode after revising to verify each comment was addressed. ## Quick Start Ask the assistant to review this paper and paste the manuscript text or provide the paper file.
