exekiel179/psyclaw/academic-paper-composer

Academic Paper Composer

Overview

This skill provides a systematic framework for writing academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. It implements iterative quality control at both chapter-level and paper-level, ensuring consistent high quality throughout the writing process.

Input: Detailed, optimized paper outline (from academic-paper-strategist or equivalent)

Output: Complete, submission-ready manuscript with quality validation reports

Prerequisite: Use academic-paper-strategist skill first to create optimized outline (or provide equivalent detailed outline)

When to Use This Skill

Use academic-paper-composer when you need to:

Writing Stage:

• Execute a detailed paper outline systematically
• Write a complete academic paper chapter-by-chapter
• Maintain quality control during writing process
• Ensure consistency across all sections

Quality Assurance Stage:

• Validate each chapter before proceeding
• Check cross-chapter coherence
• Perform final quality assessment
• Verify submission readiness

Submission Preparation Stage:

• Prepare manuscript for platform submission
• Complete platform-specific checklists
• Generate final submission package

Triggers:

• "Write the paper from this outline"
• "Compose the full manuscript"
• "Execute the outline systematically"
• "I have an outline, help me write the paper"
• After completing academic-paper-strategist skill

Workflow Overview

Phase 4: SYSTEMATIC WRITING (Chapter-by-Chapter + Quality Gates)
    ↓
Phase 5: QUALITY CONTROL (Final Validation + Submission Prep)
    ↓
Output: Submission-Ready Manuscript + Quality Reports

Quality Gates: After each chapter + final paper evaluation

Required Input

Before using this skill, you must provide:

1. Optimized Detailed Outline

Required structure:

## Abstract (250-300 words)
-[Key points to cover]
 
## 1. Introduction (1,500 words)
### 1.1 Opening Puzzle (400 words)
-[Content guidance]
### 1.2 Literature Review (600 words)
-[Theories to discuss]
### 1.3 This Paper's Contribution (500 words)
-[Specific claims]
 
## 2. [Main Chapter Title] (1,200 words)
### 2.1 [Section] (400 words)
-[Argument structure]
-[Key citations]
...
 
[Complete structure with word counts and content guidance]

Quality check: Outline should specify:

• ✓ Chapter titles and word counts
• ✓ Subsection structure (to 3rd level)
• ✓ Content guidance for each section
• ✓ Key citations to include
• ✓ Argument structure notes

If outline lacks these, consider using academic-paper-strategist first.

2. Platform Writing Standards Guide

From academic-paper-strategist Phase 1, or equivalent document specifying:

• Platform style patterns (voice, terminology, citation format)
• Structural conventions
• Example papers for reference

3. Literature Base (Optional but Recommended)

• List of core papers to cite
• Research gap analysis
• Key concepts to emphasize

Phase 4: Systematic Writing

Goal

Write complete manuscript chapter-by-chapter with iterative quality control.

Workflow

Step 4.1: Writing Environment Setup

Before writing, I will:

1. Verify outline completeness:

• All chapters specified with word counts
• Content guidance provided
• Argument structure clear

1. Load reference documents:

• Platform writing standards
• Section writing guides (references/section_guides.md)
• Quality standards (references/writing_standards.md)

1. Create writing tracker:

```markdown # Writing Progress Tracker

• [ ] Abstract (250 words)
• [ ] Chapter 1: Introduction (1,500 words)
• [ ] Chapter 2: [Title] (1,200 words)

...

• [ ] Conclusion (1,000 words)
• [ ] References

```

Decision Point 1: Confirm outline and standards loaded, ready to begin writing.

Step 4.2: Chapter-by-Chapter Writing

For each chapter, I will follow this sequence:

A. Pre-Writing Review

Before writing chapter N:

1. Review outline specification for this chapter:

• Word count target
• Subsection structure
• Content guidance
• Key arguments/citations

1. Review previous chapter (if N>1):

• Last paragraph of chapter N-1
• Key concepts introduced
• Promises to fulfill

1. Check section guide:

• Load appropriate template from references/section_guides.md
• Review quality markers for this section type

B. Writing Execution

I will write the chapter following:

Content principles:

• Follow outline exactly: Respect structure and word counts
• Include specified citations: Use literature from outline
• Maintain platform style: Match voice and terminology
• Use section templates: Follow appropriate guide from section_guides.md

Quality targets (pre-emptive):

• Argument quality: Clear thesis, justified premises
• Citation quality: All claims supported, proper format
• Clarity: Precise prose, terms defined, good transitions
• Structure: Logical flow, proper proportions
• Style conformity: Match platform conventions

Output: Complete chapter draft

C. Post-Writing Evaluation

After completing chapter draft, I will:

1. Create evaluation document:

``bash python scripts/chapter_quality_check.py # Option 1: Create template for this chapter ``

1. Perform 5-dimension assessment:

• Argument Quality (1-4): Thesis clear? Premises justified? Objections addressed?
• Citation Quality (1-4): All claims cited? Format consistent? Key literature included?
• Clarity & Readability (1-4): Prose clear? Terms defined? Transitions smooth?
• Structure & Flow (1-4): Logical progression? Proper proportions? Follows outline?
• Platform Conformity (1-4): Style match? Voice consistent? Format correct?

1. Generate quality report:

``bash python scripts/chapter_quality_check.py # Option 2: Generate report from evaluation ``

This produces:

• Total score (X/20)
• Pass/fail (threshold: ≥16/20)
• Weak dimensions identified
• Specific revision recommendations

Quality Gate 4A (After Each Chapter):

• ✓ Score ≥16/20 (80%)
• ✓ All dimensions ≥3/4 (or revisions implemented)
• ✓ Word count within ±10% of target

If Failed: Implement revisions before proceeding to next chapter

D. Iteration (If Needed)

If chapter scores <16/20:

1. Identify weak dimension(s): Which scored <3/4?

1. Implement targeted revisions:

• Argument quality issue → Add justifications, address objections
• Citation quality issue → Add supporting citations, fix format
• Clarity issue → Simplify prose, add definitions, improve transitions
• Structure issue → Reorganize paragraphs, adjust proportions
• Style issue → Adjust voice, terminology, format

1. Re-evaluate: Generate new quality report

1. Repeat until passing (typically 1-2 iterations)

Important: Do not proceed to next chapter until current chapter passes quality gate.

E. Chapter Completion

Once chapter passes quality gate:

1. Mark chapter complete in writing tracker
2. Save chapter with quality report
3. Note key concepts introduced (for coherence check later)
4. Preview next chapter requirements

Decision Point 2 (After Major Chapters): After completing each main body chapter, I will:

• Present completed chapter summary
• Show quality score
• Ask: Proceed to next chapter or revise further?

Step 4.3: Writing Sequence

Recommended order:

1. Introduction (write first)

• Establishes thesis and roadmap
• Use introduction guide from section_guides.md
• Quality check: Abstract promises, literature coverage, clear contribution

1. Main Body Chapters (in outline order)

• Follow outline sequence
• Quality check after each
• Build on previous chapters

1. Conclusion (write after main body)

• Synthesizes findings
• Addresses introduction promises
• Use conclusion guide from section_guides.md

1. Abstract (write last)

• Summarizes complete paper
• Use abstract guide from section_guides.md
• Quality check: Standalone, accurate, compelling

1. References (compile throughout)

• Format according to platform standards
• Verify all citations present

Step 4.4: Cross-Chapter Coherence Check

After all chapters written, before final evaluation:

1. Terminology consistency:

• Extract key terms from each chapter
• Verify consistent usage throughout
• Check definitions consistent

1. Argument flow:

• Verify chapter N+1 builds on chapter N
• Check roadmap (intro) matches execution
• Ensure conclusion addresses introduction promises

1. Citation patterns:

• Check for uneven citation distribution
• Verify key works cited where relevant
• Ensure bibliography complete

Output: Cross-chapter coherence report identifying any inconsistencies

Phase 5: Quality Control

Goal

Perform comprehensive final evaluation and prepare submission-ready manuscript.

Workflow

Step 5.1: Content Completeness Check

Using structured checklist, verify:

Structural Completeness:

• [ ] Abstract (250-300 words)
• [ ] Introduction with all required elements
• [ ] All outlined main chapters present
• [ ] Conclusion with all required elements
• [ ] References section formatted correctly

Content Completeness:

• [ ] All introduction promises fulfilled
• [ ] All claims supported by evidence or argument
• [ ] All technical terms defined
• [ ] All objections addressed
• [ ] All limitations acknowledged

Citation Completeness:

• [ ] Every citation in text has bibliography entry
• [ ] Every bibliography entry cited in text
• [ ] Citation format consistent throughout
• [ ] All citations include necessary information

Format Completeness:

• [ ] Title page (if required)
• [ ] Section numbering consistent
• [ ] Heading hierarchy logical
• [ ] Figure/table captions (if applicable)

Output: Completeness checklist report

Step 5.2: Final 7-Dimension Evaluation

I will perform comprehensive evaluation using:

python scripts/final_evaluation.py
# Create evaluation template

7 Dimensions (10 points each, 70 total):

1. Overall Argument Quality (1-10)

• Thesis clarity throughout
• Chapter integration
• Logical completeness
• Objections addressed

1. Literature Integration (1-10)

• Citation count (40-60 typical for philosophy)
• Key literature covered
• Citations well-integrated
• Critical engagement present

1. Clarity & Accessibility (1-10)

• Prose clarity
• Complex ideas explained
• Appropriate for audience
• Technical terms defined

1. Originality & Contribution (1-10)

• Clear original contribution
• Advance over literature
• Significance established
• Innovation present

1. Methodological Rigor (1-10)

• Method explicit and justified
• Consistently applied
• Appropriate for question
• Limitations acknowledged

1. Structure & Organization (1-10)

• Logical flow
• Optimal organization
• Proportions balanced
• Transitions seamless

1. Platform & Style Conformity (1-10)

• Style matches platform
• Format correct
• Voice consistent
• Citation format perfect

Scoring Process:

1. Evaluate each dimension (1-10)
2. Provide detailed notes for each
3. Complete completeness checklist
4. List any specific issues

Generate report:

python scripts/final_evaluation.py
# Generate final report

This produces:

• Total score (X/70)
• Pass/fail (threshold: ≥56/70)
• Weak dimensions identified
• Completeness assessment
• Prioritized revision recommendations
• Submission readiness decision

Quality Gate 5 (Final):

• ✓ Score ≥56/70 (80%)
• ✓ All completeness checklist items complete
• ✓ All high-priority issues addressed