Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add Rezenders/scientific_writing_agent --skill full-manuscript-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Rezenders/scientific_writing_agentWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/rezenders/scientific_writing_agent/full-manuscript-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rezenders/scientific_writing_agent/full-manuscript-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rezenders/scientific_writing_agent/full-manuscript-audit/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rezenders/scientific_writing_agent/full-manuscript-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rezenders/scientific_writing_agent/full-manuscript-audit.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00063 | $0.00819 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00409 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00164 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00082 |
Grade A, and why
full-manuscript-audit scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Full Manuscript Audit
Full-manuscript pre-submission audit. Orchestrates all review agents across every section and produces a unified go/no-go report.
When to Use
- Before submission or resubmission
- After a major revision cycle affecting multiple sections
- When starting a new writing session after a long break
- As the final step before running
/pre-submission
Inputs Required
Tell Claude:
- Scope: "full manuscript" or a list of specific sections to prioritize
- Focus (optional): known risk areas (e.g. "pay extra attention to evaluation claims" or "check all comparisons with the baseline")
Workflow
Phase 1 — Annotation Inventory
Run /find-annotations to get a complete list of open todos, author comments, and revision markers across the manuscript.
Report: how many open annotations exist, which sections have the most, and whether any are in blocking positions (near key claims or marked for attention).
Phase 2 — Full Consistency Audit
Invoke consistency-auditor with scope: full manuscript.
Ask it to check:
- Macro and terminology drift across all section files
- Acronym consistency (first use, expansion, subsequent use)
- Contribution-statement alignment (introduction vs. body vs. conclusion)
- Ambiguous terminology that has multiple meanings in the paper
- Cross-section contradictions in claims
Phase 3 — Section-by-Section Scientific Review
For each section in order, invoke scientific-paper-reviewer:
Ask: "Review for clarity, redundancy, claim precision, paragraph flow, and alignment with neighbouring sections. Flag critical issues only — skip minor style notes for speed."
Sections to cover (adapt to your document structure):
- Introduction
- Background / Related Work
- Model / Method / Approach
- Framework / System / Architecture
- Implementation (if present)
- Evaluation / Experiments / Results
- Discussion
- Conclusions
Phase 4 — Implementation Spot-Check (optional)
If the paper describes a codebase, invoke paper-implementation-checker on the highest-risk claims:
- How key data structures or algorithms are represented
- Trigger conditions or control flow described in prose
- Any claim in the Evaluation section about system behavior or performance
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 12d ago First seen · 114 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 1e1ad7c6dbe9
full-manuscript-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository Rezenders/scientific_writing_agent (11 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 819 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
instrument-data-to-allotrope
Convert laboratory instrument output files (PDF, CSV, Excel, TXT) to Allotrope Simple Model (ASM) JSON format or flattened 2D CSV. Use this skill when scientists need to standardize instrument data for LIMS systems, data lakes, or downstream analysis. Supports auto-detection of instrument types. Outputs include full…
matlab
Build, review, migrate, and safely plan MATLAB or GNU Octave numerical workflows, including arrays, tabular/time data, tests, projects, graphics, MAT files, and explicit Python interoperability.
exploratory-data-analysis
Perform bounded, local exploratory analysis of explicitly supported scientific files. Use for redacted CSV/TSV/JSON profiles; optional NumPy, HDF5, FASTA/FASTQ, and basic image metadata inspection; missingness/leakage audits; outlier and transformation sensitivity; and rigorous EDA report scaffolds. Other domain…
phylogenetics
Build and analyze phylogenetic trees using MAFFT (multiple alignment), IQ-TREE 2 (maximum likelihood), and FastTree (fast NJ/ML). Visualize with ETE3 or FigTree. For evolutionary analysis, microbial genomics, viral phylodynamics, protein family analysis, and molecular clock studies.
research-engineer
An uncompromising Academic Research Engineer. Operates with absolute scientific rigor, objective criticism, and zero flair. Focuses on theoretical correctness, formal verification, and optimal implementation across any required technology.
mapping-to-snomed
Maps clinical concept spans extracted by OpenMed to SNOMED CT concepts through a USER-SUPPLIED terminology server (the user's own Ontoserver, Snowstorm, or UMLS/UTS), never a bundled vocabulary. Use when the user wants to code findings, disorders, procedures, body structures, or substances to SNOMED CT, run an ECL…