Audits academic/thesis citations — unresolved citation keys, claims not actually supported by their cited source, unused bibliography entries, DOI/metadata mismatches. Use proactively before a submission or milestone, or when asked to check citations or the bibliography.
Checks academic/thesis documents for internal consistency — terminology drift, broken cross-references, figure-caption-text mismatch, definitions used before they're introduced. Use proactively after edits touching multiple sections, or when asked to check a document for internal consistency.
Checks a compiled academic document's rendered layout — float placement, figure/table sizing and overlap, caption-position consistency. Use when a PDF has just been built/rendered and you want it checked before submission, or when asked to check document layout.
Reviews academic/thesis argument structure — paragraph transitions, narrative arc, redundancy, unstated logical leaps — independent of prose quality. Use proactively after a section is drafted, or when asked whether an academic argument actually holds together.
Adversarial reviewer that tries to argue an academic document's claims outrun its evidence — a hostile peer-reviewer pass, not an improvement-suggestion pass. Use only after standard review lenses (technical/logic/consistency) have already run and their findings are addressed — running this on a rough draft wastes its…
Adversarial reviewer that tries to argue an academic document's methodology or design is unsound — a hostile peer-reviewer pass, not an improvement-suggestion pass. Use only after standard review lenses (technical/logic/consistency) have already run and their findings are addressed — running this on a rough draft…
Adversarial reviewer that tries to argue an academic document's argument doesn't cohere end to end — a hostile peer-reviewer pass, not an improvement-suggestion pass. Use only after standard review lenses (technical/logic/consistency) have already run and their findings are addressed — running this on a rough draft…
Reviews academic/thesis technical claims for whether the stated result actually follows from the stated method or data, notation consistency, and citation-claim support. Use proactively after a method/results/discussion section is drafted or revised, or when asked for a hard technical review of academic writing.