Skill UI

This comprehensive checklist guides researchers through the final stages of academic manuscript preparation for submission to major journals via platforms like ScholarOne. It covers critical technical requirements, including word count limits (12,500 words), abstract length (150 words), adherence to triple-blind anonymity standards, proper formatting (World Politics Style Sheet), and ethical compliance (APSA guidelines). Use this guide before hitting the submit button to minimize avoidable rejections.

A comprehensive guide detailing the rigorous, multi-stage academic review process for top-tier data mining conferences (e.g., WSDM). It analyzes the hybrid single/double-blind architecture, the impact of no rebuttal phase, and the distinct perspectives of academic and industry reviewers. Use this guide to understand the requirements for writing and structuring submissions that maximize acceptance chances.

This guide helps scholars assess if their social, economic, or cultural history manuscript aligns with the rigorous, problem-driven standards of Past & Present. It instructs authors on framing their research around a core "big question"—a genuine historical problem—ensuring comparative significance, adhering to historiographical expectations, and meeting specific academic standards like double-blind review and Chicago style.

This guide details the rigorous review process for Production and Operations Management (POM), covering departmental screening, double-blind peer review, and the strict evaluation standards. It explains the 'twin standard' (scholarly rigor and managerial relevance), how to interpret decision letters (R&R vs. Reject), and the critical rules governing resubmission, helping authors navigate the publishing journey.

A comprehensive audit guide for authors submitting papers to the ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC). This guide details the critical requirements, including the single-column 11-point format, the double-blind anonymity rules, the importance of the abstract, table of contents, and the first twelve pages (the 'reading contract'). It covers formatting, publication policies, and the submission workflow to maximize review impact.

A comprehensive methodology for advanced red teaming and adversary emulation. This skill details how to bypass modern Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions (e.g., Defender, CrowdStrike, SentinelOne). Techniques include unhooking ntdll, utilizing indirect syscalls (Hell's Gate), patching ETW providers, and AMSI context blinding. Essential for authorized penetration testing and self-developed implant development, aligning with MITRE ATT&CK T1562.

This protocol simulates a diverse, anonymous jury of 3 to 5 specialized subagents to reach a committed, non-ambiguous verdict. It is designed to combat cognitive biases like anchoring and groupthink by running blind, independent opinions before structured deliberation. Ideal for high-stakes decisions across product development, architecture, strategy, and vendor choice where a single perspective is insufficient.

A systematic methodology for solving complex, multi-domain, or high-stakes problems where a single mental model creates blind spots. This process guides users to select 2-3 complementary models, assign distinct roles, define a conflict rule, and synthesize findings into a single, decision-ready recommendation.

Runs a structured adversarial premortem simulation for UK civil litigation. It builds the strongest version of the case and then attacks it from four critical angles (procedural, substantive, evidentiary, strategic) to pinpoint exact failure modes and blind spots before opposing counsel does. Essential for pre-issue planning, settlement strategy, and litigation fund pitches.

A rigorous, standalone tool designed for explicit, blind, and adversarial code review. It executes the code target through two parallel, independent judges (Judge A and Judge B) with strict rules and limited fix rounds. This process ensures maximum scrutiny, providing a definitive, highly corroborated verdict (APPROVED or ESCALATED) that replaces standard review methods.

This skill orchestrates a two-model debate review for GitHub PRs, GitLab MRs, or Azure DevOps pull requests. It pits a main reviewer against a debate reviewer to identify code quality issues and blind spots before posting final inline comments. The tool supports local working tree reviews and requires delegate-skills lanes for automation. It ensures thorough pre-merge analysis without direct approval actions.

Hunt LDAP injection and XPath injection vulnerabilities in web applications. Covers authentication bypass, blind attribute exfiltration, and Active Directory vs generic LDAP differences. Includes attack surface signals, filter grammar, and authorized-use guidance.