Pre submission report
Use when you need all quality checks run before submission, producing a single dated report.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add kenantang/codex-and-claude-skills --skill pre-submission-reportAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
SKILL.md
4.8 KB, ~1.2k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Pre-Submission Report
Aggregates all quality checks into one dated report. Run before submitting to a journal/conference or sharing with collaborators.
When to Use
- Before submitting a paper to a venue
- Before sharing a draft with supervisors or co-authors
- When the user says "pre-submission check", "is this ready?", "run everything"
Input
- A
.texfile path, or auto-detectpaper/main.texin the current project
Critical Rule
Python: Always use uv run python or uv pip install. Never bare python, python3, pip, or pip3. Include this in any sub-agent prompts.
Steps
1. Locate the Paper
If no argument provided, search for the main .tex file:
- Check
paper/main.tex - Check
paper/*.texfor a file containing\begin{document} - Ask the user if ambiguous
2. Integrity Gate (hard gate — must pass before quality checks)
Run these checks first. If any fail, stop and report — do not proceed to quality checks.
- Placeholder scan — grep the
.texfile(s) forTODO,FIXME,XXX,TBD,[INSERT,PLACEHOLDER,Lorem ipsum. Any match is a FAIL. - Citation integrity — invoke
/bib-validatein verify mode. Every\cite{}key must resolve to a.bibentry. Any missing key is a FAIL. - Section completeness — check that all standard sections exist and are non-empty (Abstract, Introduction, and at least one body section before Conclusion/References). An empty or missing section is a FAIL.
- Broken references — grep for
??in the compiled PDF output or.logfile (undefined\ref{}or\cite{}). Any??in output is a FAIL.
If any check fails:
INTEGRITY GATE: FAIL
Blockers (must fix before quality checks):
- [ ] 3 TODO placeholders found (lines 47, 112, 289)
- [ ] 2 undefined references (\ref{fig:missing}, \cite{nonexistent2024})
- [ ] Abstract section is empty
Fix these and re-run /pre-submission-report.
If all pass: proceed to Step 3.
3. Run Quality Checks
Run these sequentially (each depends on a clean state):
- Compilation — invoke
/latexon the main.texfile. Record pass/fail and any remaining warnings. - Citation audit — invoke
/bib-validate(full mode — deep verify). Record missing, unused, and suspect keys. - Adversarial review — launch
paper-criticagent (via Task tool). Capture the CRITIC-REPORT.md score and findings.
4. Aggregate Report
Save to log/audits/quality-reports/YYYY-MM-DD_<project-name>.md:
# Pre-Submission Quality Report
**Project:** <project name>
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**File:** <path to main.tex>
**Target:** <venue from project CLAUDE.md, or "not specified">
---
## Integrity Gate: PASS / FAIL
- **Placeholders:** 0 found
- **Citation integrity:** all keys resolved
- **Section completeness:** all sections present
- **Broken references:** none
---
## Overall Score: XX/100 — [Verdict]
Verdict uses the quality scoring framework:
- 90-100: Publication-ready
- 80-89: Minor revisions needed
- 70-79: Significant revisions needed
- Below 70: Not ready
---
## Compilation
- **Status:** PASS / FAIL
- **Warnings:** <count>
- **Details:** <brief summary of any issues>
## Citations
- **Missing keys:** <count> — <list>
- **Unused keys:** <count> — <list>
- **Suspect entries:** <count> — <list>
## Adversarial Review
- **Score:** XX/100
- **Key findings:**
- <finding 1>
- <finding 2>
- ...
## Research Quality Score
Load `skills/shared/research-quality-rubric.md` and report the weighted aggregate (X.X / 5.0) with verdict.
## Remaining Issues
| # | Severity | Category | Issue |
|---|----------|----------|-------|
| 1 | High/Medium/Low | Compilation/Citation/Content | <description> |
## Recommendation
**[Submit / Revise / Not ready]**
<1-2 sentence summary of what needs to happen before submission>
5. Present Summary
Display the report path and the summary table to the user. If the recommendation is "Submit", congratulate. If "Revise", list the top 3 issues to fix first.
Error Handling
- If compilation fails after
/latex, still run the remaining checks. Mark compilation as FAIL in the report. - If
paper-criticagent fails, note it in the report and base the overall score on compilation + citations only. - Always produce the report file, even if some checks failed.
Integration
| Skill/Agent | Role in this workflow |
|---|---|
/latex | Compilation + auto-fix |
/bib-validate | Citation cross-reference |
paper-critic agent | Adversarial content review |
quality-scoring.md | Verdict thresholds |
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.