scientific-writinglisted

# Scientific Writing Use this as the single scientific-writing skill for both Codex and Claude Code. It covers two related modes of work: - **Drafting and revision** — produce a manuscript or rebuttal from authoritative artifacts and iterate it through review-revise loops. - **Sentence-level writing review** — audit existing prose for clarity, voice, sentence architecture, terminology consistency, and numerical integrity, without changing the underlying science. The two modes share the same role set and the same hard rules. Pick the entry point that matches the request; the workflow then routes accordingly. ## Routing Boundary - Use this skill when the requested output is manuscript prose or a prose- quality review that preserves the underlying scientific claims. - Use `/bio-logic` when the main question is whether a method, design, causal claim, or interpretation is scientifically justified. - Use `/manuscript-review-council` for journal-style peer review or a multi-reviewer critique. Route the resulting evidence-backed revisions back here. - Generic requests containing only “write” do not establish scientific-writing intent and should remain unmatched. ## State Assumptions First Before drafting or reviewing, state: - manuscript mode: new draft, revision, rebuttal, review response, section rewrite, or writing review - review mode when this is a writing review: `full-review`, `section-review`, `targeted`, or `interactive` (see below) - target venue or format