nsfc-benzi-audit

NSFC Benzi Audit

Produce applicant-facing diagnosis and revision advice grounded in the supplied draft. Expose substantive logic breaks, weak evidence and high-impact fixes. Do not fabricate literature, results, project histories, budgets or official requirements.

This workflow gives applicant revision advice. If the user requests formal communication review, identify that separate scope and use a suitable review skill only if available. No companion skill is required for draft-internal diagnosis.

Workflow

1. Select the source and establish the review scope.
   • Prioritize the source and revision explicitly identified by the user. Separate target drafts, funded examples, old reports, templates and notes. Never select a draft merely because it is the largest Markdown file or named full.md/output.md.
   • Reuse extracted text only after matching its title, revision and contents to the selected original. Record source path/version and extraction provenance. If multiple plausible drafts cannot be distinguished, ask which one to use.
   • For PDF/DOCX, use available extraction/OCR tools and preserve headings and tables. If extraction is unavailable, state the limitation and work on readable supplied material; do not invent a tool or require a named companion skill.
   • Inspect original figures when judging visual logic or evidence, including preliminary results. Converted mermaid/OCR is not authoritative. Missing extraction is a material gap, not proof that the applicant omitted content.
   • Record application year, exact project category (including 青年 A/B/C where known), form version/source, funding mode (包干制/预算制/待确认), research attribute, application code and source completeness. Keep historical-example years separate from the target year.
   • Use questions, goals and methods as analytical dimensions wherever they occur. Require separate headings only when the applicable form requires them. If year or form is unknown, continue content diagnosis and mark rule applicability unresolved.
   • For a quick pass, focus on title, abstract, scientific questions, contents, innovation and basis. For full diagnosis, cover all supplied sections. A 专项 request (one chapter, one question) stays within that scope. Do not report absent attachments or omitted excerpts as confirmed defects in the original application.
   • For long or multi-file drafts, keep section/page locators and a running list of candidate findings with their locations while reading; before closing, revisit only unresolved candidates and report any source ranges you could not read.