This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill. It tells you which sci- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at Science (AAAS).
Default assumption: unless the user states otherwise, the target is Science (the flagship research journal), not Science Advances, Science Translational Medicine, or other family titles. Family titles share house style but differ on scope and length — flag the difference if the user names one.
Science rejects most submissions without external review. The editorial bar is broad significance and general interest, not technical correctness alone. So the first question is never "is the science right?" — it is "does this clear the desk-reject filter for a general audience?" Route to sci-fit first, always.
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Not sure the result is broad/general-interest enough | sci-fit |
| Result is significant but the "why it matters" is buried | sci-framing |
| No one-sentence summary; abstract reads narrow/jargon-heavy | sci-abstract |
| Unsure whether this is a Research Article or a Report; over length | sci-writing |
| Figures over panel/word budget; fonts/colors non-compliant | sci-figures |
| Stats under-reported; n/error bars/tests unclear; not reproducible | sci-statistics |
| No data/code/materials availability plan | sci-data |
| References not in Science numbered style | sci-citation |
| Need an editor-facing pitch for why Science should review it | sci-cover-letter |
| About to submit; need a preflight checklist | sci-submission |
| Received reviews / an R&R decision | sci-rebuttal |
sci-fit — clear the broad-significance / general-interest bar firstsci-framing — lock the conceptual advance and the "why now"sci-writing — choose format (Research Article vs Report) and hold lengthsci-figures — finalize display items within budgetsci-statistics — rigor & reproducibility reportingsci-data — data / code / materials availabilitysci-abstract — abstract + one-sentence summary (late polish)sci-citation — reference style passsci-cover-letter — significance-forward editor pitchsci-submission — preflightsci-rebuttal — after review
sci-abstractandsci-citationare late-stage polish. Do not perfect the abstract before the significance and format are settled.
sci-fit
sci-framing
sci-writing (Reports target ~2,500)sci-writing (Reports push Methods to Supplementary)sci-statistics + sci-figures
sci-data
sci-cover-letter
sci-citation, sci-abstract).Track the manuscript's position in the pipeline with this ledger so every routing decision is explicit and auditable:
SCIENCE (AAAS) MANUSCRIPT STAGE LEDGER
======================================
Target venue : Science | Science Advances | reroute → ______
Format : Report | Research Article | undecided
Stage gates (mark ✓ / ✗ / n/a, with date):
[ ] sci-fit significance rung ≥3, general-interest test passed
[ ] sci-framing one-sentence advance locked; why-now named
[ ] sci-writing format chosen; main text within word budget
[ ] sci-figures display items ≤ budget; fonts/colors compliant
[ ] sci-statistics n, tests, effect sizes, error bars reported
[ ] sci-data deposition + accession numbers + availability statement
[ ] sci-abstract ≤125-word abstract + one-sentence summary
[ ] sci-citation numbered refs, order of appearance, full author lists
[ ] sci-cover-letter significance-forward editor pitch drafted
[ ] sci-submission preflight checklist clean
[ ] sci-rebuttal (post-review only) point-by-point response
Current bottleneck : ______ Next skill: sci-______
Open risks : over-claiming? length? missing deposition? ______
Re-emit the ledger after each sub-skill completes; a gate marked ✗ upstream (especially sci-fit) invalidates every ✓ downstream of it.
sci-fit and start polishing prose — the modal outcome is desk rejection.sci-figures beautify panels before the format/length decision in sci-writing.