What problem does it solve? Authors submitting to high-impact journals often cannot anticipate how referees will attack novelty, significance, technical soundness, or readability before submission. This Skill simulates a Nature-style peer review from the referee perspective so authors can find and fix weaknesses early. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Mutually blind multi-reviewer simulation: Produces three independent reviewer reports in isolated contexts, then generates a cross-review synthesis only after all reports are frozen. - Evidence-grounded tiered concerns: Separates Major Concerns and Minor Comments with stable IDs, claim pointers, evidence pointers, blocking flags, and resolution tests, without inventing issues to fill quotas. - Domain-aware technical checks: Applies a 12-axis internal concern taxonomy plus domain gates for chemistry, engineering, materials, atmospheric science, climate ecology, hydrology, and remote sensing. - Use Case: Before submitting a manuscript, paste the abstract, introduction, and figure legends to receive three reviewer-style reports plus a synthesis listing consensus blocking concerns and a deduplicated minor-revision checklist. ## 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.
