Skills peer-review
📦

peer-review

Content revision r1 Safe ⚙️ External commands

Review Scientific Manuscripts Systematically

Scientific peer review requires consistent checks across methods, statistics, ethics, figures, and reporting standards. This skill guides Claude, Codex, and Claude Code through structured review workflows with actionable feedback.

Supports: Claude Codex Code(CC)
📊 74 Adequate

Install with my Agent

Copy this request to your Agent. It includes the canonical Skill page and manifest.

Agent request
Review the Skillstore skill "peer-review" from https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-peer-review.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/davila7-peer-review/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.

Your Agent should still show its plan and request any confirmation required by the security policy.

Agent-readable resources

Use these links when an AI agent, crawler, or script needs clean context instead of reading the full page.

Markdown detail GET /skills/davila7-peer-review.md Signed manifest GET /api/skills/davila7-peer-review/manifest Signed lockfile GET /api/skills/davila7-peer-review/lockfile

Test it

Using "peer-review". Review a manuscript describing an observational cohort study with incomplete follow-up data.

Expected outcome:

  • Summary of the study and overall recommendation
  • Major concern about missing data handling and possible attrition bias
  • Suggested sensitivity analyses and clearer reporting of participant flow

Using "peer-review". Assess figures and statistical reporting in a biomedical manuscript.

Expected outcome:

  • Feedback on unclear error bars and missing sample sizes
  • Request for effect sizes and confidence intervals
  • Suggestions for replacing bar charts with plots that show distributions

Using "peer-review". Review a scientific presentation PDF for readability and content flow.

Expected outcome:

  • Slide-by-slide layout issues
  • Comments on font size, contrast, and figure readability
  • Recommendations for improving narrative structure and timing

Security Audit

Safe
v13 • 7/9/2026 Open versioned report

All static findings were adjudicated as false positives. The referenced files contain scientific peer review guidance and markdown code fences or local workflow examples, with no evidence of malicious intent, reconnaissance, prompt injection, or data exfiltration.

3
Files scanned
1,410
Lines analyzed
0
Review items
0
False positives ignored

Risk Factors

⚙️ External commands (10)
SKILL.md:36-38 SKILL.md:38-194 SKILL.md:194-398 SKILL.md:398-401 SKILL.md:401-407 SKILL.md:407-410 SKILL.md:410-497 SKILL.md:497-502 SKILL.md:502-524 SKILL.md:524-536
No confirmed security findings were detected by the latest completed static and semantic audit. This does not prove the skill has no side effects.
Audited by: claude View Audit History →
Share & cite this report

Share the versioned assessment report, neutral badge, embed card, and citations. Skillstore reports evidence without deciding whether this Skill is safe.

Open versioned report
Security Assessment

Copy report link

https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-peer-review/audits/13?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_report

Markdown badge

[![Skillstore security assessment](https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/davila7-peer-review/security.svg)](https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-peer-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge)

HTML badge

<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-peer-review?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/davila7-peer-review/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>

Embed card

<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/davila7-peer-review.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>
Academic citations (APA · BibTeX · CFF)

APA citation

davila7. (2026). peer-review security audit report (audit version 13) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-peer-review/audits/13

BibTeX citation

@techreport{davila7-davila7-peer-review-2026, author = {davila7}, title = {peer-review security audit report (audit version 13)}, institution = {Skillstore}, year = {2026}, number = {13}, url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-peer-review/audits/13}, note = {Author version unspecified} }

CITATION.cff

cff-version: 1.2.0 message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report." title: "peer-review security audit report (audit version 13)" version: "unspecified" type: report authors: - name: "davila7" date-released: "2026-07-09" url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/davila7-peer-review/audits/13" identifiers: - type: other value: "skillstore:davila7-peer-review:audit:13" description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"

Compare variants

2 installable variants

Each author remains a separate installable skill. The recommended variant is ranked by Skillstore evidence.

Why this variant is first

Higher Skillstore usage
davila7 Recommended Current

davila7-peer-review

Skillstore Score 74
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 13
Updated

2026-08-21

K-Dense-AI

k-dense-ai-peer-review

Skillstore Score 74
Evidence Confidence High
Skillstore usage 9
Updated

2026-08-21

Skillstore Score

Why this score Evidence Confidence: High
41
Architecture
85
Maintainability
87
Content
71
Community
78
Spec Compliance

What You Can Build

Evaluate a journal manuscript

Use a structured workflow to identify major validity concerns, minor clarity issues, and a balanced recommendation.

Assess research rigor before submission

Check methods, statistics, reproducibility, figures, and reporting completeness before sending a manuscript to a journal.

Review a grant proposal

Evaluate significance, approach, feasibility, ethics, and clarity with constructive feedback for applicants.

Try These Prompts

Quick manuscript assessment 
Review this manuscript at a high level. Summarize the research question, main findings, key strengths, and the top three concerns.
Methods and statistics review 
Evaluate the methods and statistical analysis. Check sample size, controls, assumptions, missing data, multiple testing, and whether conclusions are supported.
Reporting standards compliance check 
Identify the relevant reporting guideline for this study type and check whether the manuscript addresses the major required items.
Full peer review report 
Prepare a complete peer review report with a summary statement, major comments, minor comments, questions for authors, and an overall recommendation.

Best Practices

  • Provide the manuscript, figures, supplement, and target journal or review criteria when possible.
  • Ask for separate passes when you need deep statistics, ethics, or figure-integrity review.
  • Keep final feedback specific, constructive, and prioritized by impact on validity.

Avoid

  • Do not ask for a final recommendation before the methods and results have been reviewed.
  • Do not use the skill to replace specialist review for highly technical domain claims.
  • Do not request unnecessary experiments that exceed the study scope without explaining why they are essential.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can this skill review grants as well as manuscripts?
Yes. It can assess significance, approach, feasibility, rigor, ethics, and clarity for research proposals.
Does it support reporting guidelines?
Yes. It includes references for major standards such as CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, ARRIVE, MIAME, and MINSEQE.
Can it detect image manipulation?
It provides checks for possible image integrity concerns, but it cannot prove manipulation without suitable image evidence and expert review.
Will it write a full reviewer report?
Yes. It can organize comments into a summary, major issues, minor issues, author questions, and a recommendation.
Can it review slide decks?
Yes. For presentation PDFs, it instructs the assistant to convert slides to images and inspect each slide visually.
Is this suitable for confidential peer review?
It can help structure confidential reviews, but users must follow journal, funder, and institutional confidentiality rules.

Developer Details

Author

davila7

License

MIT

Skillstore revision

r1

Version notice

The author did not declare a version.

Repository

https://github.com/davila7/claude-code-templates/tree/main/cli-tool/components/skills/scientific/peer-review

Ref

b959ebfd1043a07c0c4378ab94ca4342cb0259f5

Maintenance freshness

7/20/2026

Usage

8 downloads · 242 views

File structure

📁 references/

📄 common_issues.md

📄 reporting_standards.md

📄 SKILL.md