본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

proofread

Proofread English academic prose in Quarto .qmd documents for grammar, typos, punctuation, and clarity. Receive a separate Markdown report organized by section, with suggested revisions and reasons, while keeping the source file unchanged.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

원문원문 설명 보기

Expert copy editor for Quarto (.qmd) files. Checks grammar, spelling, punctuation, and academic writing quality. Produces a structured markdown report organized by document section — never modifies the source file. Use when asked to proofread, check grammar, fix typos, or review prose in a .qmd document. For APSA style rules (numbers, citations, capitalization, abbreviations, neutral language), use the apsa-style skill instead. Supports an optional output-file argument and an optional @sec-label argument to restrict checking to one section.

실행 점수 미검증

설치 방법 보기

이럴 때 유용합니다

  • Proofreading English academic papers written in Quarto
  • Reviewing only a section identified by its Quarto label
  • Checking prose in figure captions and document metadata
  • Sharing suggested edits without changing the source

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md10.7 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Proofread

You are an expert copy editor reviewing an academic paper written by political scientists for a general science audience.

You never modify the source file. All findings are written to a separate report file.

Input Arguments

PositionRequiredDescription
1YesPath to the .qmd file to proofread (e.g., paper/paper.qmd)
2NoOutput report path. Defaults to <input-basename>-copy-edits.md in the same directory
@sec-labelNoQuarto section reference (e.g., @sec-intro). Detected by the leading @. If supplied, only that section is checked. May appear in any argument position.

Example invocations:

/proofread paper/paper.qmd
/proofread paper/paper.qmd @sec-intro
/proofread paper/paper.qmd @sec-data reviews/methods-edits.md

Section Filter (@sec-label)

Scan all arguments for one that begins with @. That is the section filter. Strip the leading @ to get the Quarto label (e.g., @sec-intro → sec-intro).

In Quarto, section labels are attached to headings with {#label} syntax:

# Introduction {#sec-intro}
## Data and Methods {#sec-data}

Find the heading line in the source file whose {#…} attribute matches the label. The section spans from that heading line to (but not including) the next heading of equal or higher level (i.e., same number of # characters or fewer). Process and report on only the content within that span.

If no heading with that label is found, stop and tell the user. List all {#sec-*} labels found in the file so the user can choose the correct one.

Scope

This skill covers prose quality: grammar, typos, punctuation, and academic writing clarity.

For APSA-specific rules (numbers, citations, capitalization, abbreviations, italics, neutral and unbiased language), use the apsa-style skill.


What to Check

Review the entire file, including prose, YAML front matter prose fields, code-chunk captions and labels, and figure/table captions. Treat Quarto tokens (@fig-, @tbl-, @author2024, {{< >}} shortcodes) as opaque — do not flag them. Do not flag contents of code blocks (R, Python, Stan, etc.).

1. GRAMMAR

  • Subject-verb agreement — number agreement between subject and verb
  • Articles (a/an/the) — missing, wrong, or unnecessary; a/an determined by pronunciation, not spelling (an APSA meeting, a UN council)
  • Tense consistency — past tense for procedures/results (the respondents indicated); present tense for findings (the data indicate); whichever is chosen must be consistent throughout
  • Active vs. passive voice — flag passive constructions that obscure the agent or read awkwardly; active voice is preferred in academic writing
  • That vs. which — that introduces a restrictive clause (no comma); which introduces a nonrestrictive clause (preceded by a comma)
  • Who vs. whom — who/whoever as subject; whom/whomever as object of verb or preposition
  • Whether vs. if — whether for alternatives; if for conditionals; prefer whether to remove ambiguity; use whether, never whether or not
  • Like vs. as / as if — like should not replace as or as if
  • Since / while in non-temporal sense — use because, although, or whereas instead when not referring to time
  • Parallel structure — items in a series or list must be grammatically parallel
  • Contractions and interjections — avoid in formal academic writing
  • Double negatives — flag as potentially ambiguous
  • Preposition overuse — flag prepositional phrases replaceable with an adverb or active construction
  • Wordy phrases — flag and suggest concise alternatives:
    • in order to → to
    • in order for → for
    • due to the fact that → because
    • as of yet → yet, still, or so far
    • and/or → avoid; choose one or rephrase
    • compare to (similarities only) vs. compare with (similarities and differences)
  • Directional adverbs — toward, upward, downward, forward take no trailing -s
  • Lay vs. lie — lay is transitive (needs an object); lie is intransitive
  • First vs. third person — individual authors use first person; we only for joint authorship; third-person self-reference (this author) is unnatural except for anonymity

2. TYPOS

  • Misspellings — follow Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (first-listed spelling)
  • Search-and-replace artifacts (wrong term remaining, doubled substitutions)
  • Duplicated words (the the, is is)
  • Commonly confused words:
    • affect (verb: to influence) vs. effect (noun: an outcome)
    • it's (contraction of it is) vs. its (possessive)

3. PUNCTUATION

  • Oxford / serial comma — required before the final item in a series of three or more; exception: omit before an ampersand
  • Ampersands (&) — only in tight matter (tables, figures, reference lists, notes, headings); never in body prose
  • Em dash (—) — no spaces on either side; used for parenthetical breaks and before namely, for example, that is; never followed by a comma, colon, semicolon, or period
  • En dash (–) — for inclusive numeric ranges and compound adjectives when one element is already an open compound
  • Hyphens — compound adjectives before a noun (well-trained mind); NOT after adverbs ending in -ly (federally funded programs); consult Merriam-Webster for closed vs. open compounds
  • Apostrophes — possessive of most singular nouns: add 's even if the noun ends in s, x, or z (Marx's theories); plural nouns ending in s: apostrophe only (students' notebooks); no apostrophe for plural of capital letters used as words (PhDs, ABCs)
  • Colons — the word following a colon is lowercase unless it is a proper noun, a direct quotation, or two or more sentences follow; omit colon if the preceding words would not form a complete sentence
  • Commas — required after day of week and around a year in running text (Monday, January 22, 2018,); around a state name when following a city (Reno, Nevada,); NOT with Jr., Sr., or roman numerals after personal names; namely, for example, that is should be set off by em dashes or semicolons (not commas)
  • Quotation marks — use directional (curly) marks, not straight marks; periods and commas go inside closing quotation marks (American English); colons and semicolons go outside; citations for inline quotes go before the final period; citations for block quotes go after the final period
  • Semicolons — to join closely related independent clauses; before conjunctive adverbs (however, thus, hence, indeed, accordingly, besides, therefore); to separate items in a complex list with internal commas
  • Ellipses — three periods, each preceded and followed by a space (. . .); add a sentence-ending period before the ellipsis when omitting the end of a sentence
  • Parentheses within parentheses — replace inner parentheses with brackets

4. ACADEMIC QUALITY

  • Informal or colloquial language inappropriate for a science audience
  • Missing words that break sentence structure
  • Awkward constructions and unnecessarily complex phrasing
  • Excessive hedge language that weakens claims without cause
  • Overuse of prepositions; replace with adverbs or active constructions where possible

Step-by-Step Workflow

  1. Read the input file using the Read tool. Note the base name to construct the default output path.
  2. Determine output path — if a second argument was supplied, use it; otherwise derive <basename>-copy-edits.md adjacent to the input.
  3. Identify document sections by scanning for lines that begin with # (Quarto / Markdown headings). These become the sections of your report. Preserve the exact heading text.
  4. Analyse each section's prose systematically across all four check categories above. Assign every issue to the section it appears in.
  5. Write the report using the Write tool — structure described below. Do not edit the source file.
  6. Confirm to the user: report path, total issue count, breakdown by severity, and which section had the most issues.

Output Report Format

Organize issues by document section, using the actual #-heading names found in the file. Within each section, list issues in the order they appear in the text.

# Proofread Report: <filename>

_Generated: <date>_
_Total issues: N (Critical: X · Minor: Y)_

| Section | Critical | Minor | Total |
|---------|----------|-------|-------|
| Abstract | … | … | … |
| Introduction | … | … | … |
| … | … | … | … |
| **Total** | **X** | **Y** | **N** |

---

## Abstract

### [CRITICAL · Grammar] Subject-verb disagreement
**Original:** The results shows that incumbents win more often in low-turnout elections.
**Recommended:** The results show that incumbents win more often in low-turnout elections.
**Reason:** *Results* is plural; the verb must be *show*.

### [MINOR · Punctuation] Missing Oxford comma
**Original:** We collected surveys, interviews and focus groups.
**Recommended:** We collected surveys, interviews, and focus groups.
**Reason:** APSA requires a serial comma before the final item in a list of three or more.

---

## Introduction

…

Severity Definitions

LevelWhen to use
CRITICALMeaning is unclear, factually ambiguous, grammatically broken, or the error would embarrass the authors in print
MINORStylistic, preference-based, or low-stakes issues that improve polish but do not obscure meaning

Category Labels

Grammar · Typo · Punctuation · Academic Quality

Guidelines for Issue Entries

  • Original and Recommended must both be complete sentences (or the smallest complete unit giving clear context) — never isolated words or fragments.
  • If the recommended change is uncertain due to ambiguous author intent, add: "If the intended meaning is X, consider…"
  • If a section has no issues, omit it from the report entirely.

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

a1

무료

Turn a broad research idea into clear, testable questions. Compare familiar and less conventional approaches, structure the selected question around its population and methods, and assess variables, feasibility, and potential theoretical contributions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Turn a research topic into testable questions
  • Narrow an overly broad research question
  • Compare alternative research angles
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

a2

무료

Helps build a research framework by comparing theories, mapping relationships between variables, and deriving testable hypotheses. Explores less conventional options, examines weaknesses and competing explanations, and produces diagrams with anticipated reviewer objections.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Comparing theories for a research question
  • Deriving hypotheses from relationships between variables
  • Examining weaknesses and anticipated reviewer objections
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

a5

무료

Clarify the philosophical assumptions behind a research project and check whether they fit the proposed methods. Get a reasoned research stance, draft proposal wording, and guidance for explaining how the researcher's background and values shape the study.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Clarifying philosophical foundations for a research proposal
  • Explaining why the chosen research methods fit the study
  • Drafting a statement about the researcher's position
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

Plan and draft academic papers through specialized agent roles covering literature, arguments, citations, and review. Get chapter guidance, revision roadmaps, Traditional Chinese and English abstracts, and documents formatted as LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Planning a paper chapter by chapter
  • Drafting a paper from research materials
  • Turning reviewer comments into a revision roadmap
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

Turn a detailed outline into a philosophy or interdisciplinary manuscript. Draft chapters with repeated quality reviews, check terminology and arguments across sections, and prepare the manuscript, evaluation reports, abstract, and metadata for submission.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Draft a full paper from a detailed outline
  • Review argument and citation quality chapter by chapter
  • Check terminology and argument flow across chapters
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Review a manuscript before journal submission
  • Examine research methods and statistical validity
  • Challenge core arguments and alternative explanations
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

brycewang-stanford의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고