skills/43-wentorai-research-plugins/skills/writing/polish/paper-polish-guide/SKILL.md
Review and polish LaTeX research papers for clarity and style
npx skillsauth add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research paper-polish-guideInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
The difference between a good paper and a great paper often lies in the final polishing stage. After the scientific content is solid and the structure is sound, a thorough polish pass addresses clarity, conciseness, consistency, and correctness at the sentence and paragraph level. This is where awkward phrasing is smoothed, redundancies are eliminated, and the prose is tightened to convey ideas with maximum precision and minimum friction.
This skill provides a systematic approach to polishing research papers, with a particular focus on LaTeX manuscripts. It covers common writing issues in academic papers, a multi-pass review strategy, specific patterns to search for and fix, and tools that can assist the process. The techniques apply across all academic disciplines but include LaTeX-specific advice for formatting and typographic polish.
The skill is designed for the final stages of writing, after the content and structure are complete. It is not about rewriting sections—it is about refining the existing prose to its best possible form.
Polish your paper in multiple focused passes rather than trying to fix everything at once. Each pass targets a specific aspect of the writing:
Read each paragraph and check:
Read each sentence and check:
Review word choice throughout:
For LaTeX manuscripts, check these formatting details:
% Non-breaking spaces before citations and references
as shown in prior work~\cite{smith2024}
in Figure~\ref{fig:architecture}
in Table~\ref{tab:results}
in Section~\ref{sec:methods}
% Correct dash usage
pages 1--10 % en-dash for ranges
state-of-the-art % hyphen for compound adjectives
--- and % em-dash for parenthetical (or use --)
% Math mode consistency
$n$-dimensional % variable in math mode even in text
$O(n \log n)$ % Big-O in math mode
% Consistent use of \emph{} vs \textit{}
% Use \emph{} for emphasis, \textit{} only when italic is the content (e.g., species names)
\cite{} keys resolve to entries in your .bib file| Wordy | Concise | |-------|---------| | "In order to" | "To" | | "Due to the fact that" | "Because" | | "A large number of" | "Many" | | "In the event that" | "If" | | "At the present time" | "Now" / "Currently" | | "It is possible that" | "May" / "Could" | | "Has the ability to" | "Can" | | "With regard to" | "Regarding" / "About" | | "For the purpose of" | "To" / "For" | | "On the basis of" | "Based on" |
Avoid starting sentences with:
Academic writing traditionally uses passive voice, but overuse makes prose sluggish. Use active voice for your contributions and passive for standard procedures:
Complement manual review with these tools:
chktex or lacheck to catch common LaTeX issues (missing tildes, inconsistent quotes, etc.)aspell or your editor's built-in spell checker with a custom dictionary for technical termstextlint or writegood can flag passive voice, weasel words, and other style issues# Find common issues with chktex
chktex -v3 main.tex
# Check spelling with aspell
aspell --mode=tex check main.tex
# Find inconsistent terminology
grep -n "data set\|dataset" main.tex
grep -n "pre-train\|pretrain" main.tex
Before declaring the paper polished:
\cite, \ref, and \eqref commands$3.2\,\text{ms}$development
Conduct rigorous thematic analysis (TA) of qualitative data following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase framework. Use whenever the user mentions 'thematic analysis', 'TA', 'Braun and Clarke', 'qualitative coding', 'identifying themes', or asks for help analysing interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses, or transcripts to identify patterns. Also trigger for questions about inductive vs theoretical coding, semantic vs latent themes, essentialist vs constructionist epistemology, building a thematic map, or writing up a qualitative findings section. Covers all six phases, the four upfront analytic decisions, the 15-point quality checklist, and the five common pitfalls. Produces a Word document write-up and an annotated thematic map. Does NOT cover IPA, grounded theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, or narrative analysis — use a different method for those.
development
Guide users through writing a systematic literature review (SLR) following the PRISMA 2020 framework. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'systematic review', 'systematic literature review', 'SLR', 'PRISMA', 'PRISMA 2020', 'PRISMA flow diagram', 'PRISMA checklist', or asks for help writing, structuring, or auditing a literature review that follows reporting guidelines. Also trigger when the user asks about inclusion/exclusion criteria for a review, search strategies for databases like Scopus/WoS/PubMed, study selection processes, risk of bias assessment, or narrative synthesis for a review paper. This skill covers the full PRISMA 2020 checklist (27 items), produces a Word document manuscript in strict journal article format, generates an annotated PRISMA flow diagram, and enforces APA 7th Edition referencing throughout. It does NOT cover meta-analysis or statistical pooling. By Chuah Kee Man.
testing
Performs placebo-in-time sensitivity analysis with hierarchical null model and optional Bayesian assurance. Use when checking model robustness, verifying lack of pre-intervention effects, or estimating study power.
data-ai
Fit, summarize, plot, and interpret a chosen CausalPy experiment. Use after the causal method has been selected, including when configuring PyMC/sklearn models and scale-aware custom priors.