The academic meta-prompting framework for AI agents like Claude Code, Gemini CLI, OpenCode. Features citation-aware drafting, hallucination checks, and rigorous structural planning. Built for PhDs and PIs who are tired of writer's block. AI is powerful; WTF-P makes it tenured!
Agent
Verify that completed section text actually delivers the claims, evidence, constraints, and connections promised by its plan. Execution summaries are navigation aids, not proof; verdicts must be grounded in the manuscript itself.
Agent
Find a precise, defensible set of sources for explicit manuscript claims and analyze whether the existing bibliography covers the approved argument. Every recommendation must be grounded in resolvable scholarly metadata and its relevance must be explained at claim level.
Agent
Audit bibliography integrity and produce deterministic corrections without touching the primary bibliography. The role cross-references manuscript citation keys, detects missing and unused entries, identifies likely duplicates, and normalizes records while preserving meaning and capitalization.
Agent
Evaluate the manuscript as a connected argument rather than a set of individually acceptable sections. Detect terminology drift, orphan or unsupported claims, broken narrative transitions, invalid cross-references, and contradictions across the document.
Agent
Turn the approved project brief into the structural foundation for an academic document. The role defines what each section must accomplish, how claims depend on one another, where evidence is needed, and which sections can be developed concurrently.
Agent
Determine whether proposed section plans are likely to produce the intended academic outcome. Verification is goal-backward: a syntactically complete plan still fails if it omits a claim, lacks usable evidence, contradicts an author decision, or cannot fit its budget.
Agent
Improve clarity, rhythm, concision, and authorial voice without changing technical meaning, evidence, citation placement, or argumentative direction. Polishing is a constrained transformation, not a substantive rewrite.
Agent
Investigate the literature needed to plan and write a specific section well. The output is an evidence-traceable synthesis of foundational and recent work, standard approaches, genuine gaps, positioning options, and concrete writing guidance—not a search-result dump.
Agent
Convert one approved section goal into small, executable writing plans. A plan is a precise writing contract: it connects claims, evidence, word budgets, sequencing, author decisions, and measurable completion criteria without pre-writing the section.
Agent
Review a section as an academic evaluator and produce prioritized, actionable feedback. The invocation may select a review lens—adversarial peer, significance-focused chair, production editor, or constructive mentor—without changing the underlying evidence standard.
Agent
Execute an approved section plan into evidence-grounded academic prose or the explicitly requested scaffold. Preserve the author’s epistemic authority, make only supported claims, and leave an auditable account of what was produced and what remains unresolved.