name: paper-excellence description: Comprehensive multi-dimensional review of the sewage-house-prices project. Runs econometrics audit, code review, manuscript proofread, and bibliography validation in parallel. Computes a weighted aggregate score. This skill should be used when asked for a "full review", "quality check", "paper excellence", or before submission milestones. argument-hint: "['all' or specific component: econometrics|code|paper|bib]" allowed-tools: ["Read", "Grep", "Glob", "Write", "Agent", "Bash"]

Paper Excellence Review

Run a comprehensive quality assessment of the sewage-house-prices project across all dimensions.

Input: $ARGUMENTS — all for full review, or a specific component.

Workflow

Step 1: Identify Targets

• docs/overleaf/*.tex — Manuscript sections
• scripts/R/09_analysis/ — Analysis scripts
• output/tables/ — Generated tables
• output/figures/ — Generated figures
• docs/overleaf/refs.bib — Bibliography

Step 2: Launch Review Agents (Parallel)

Launch up to 4 agents simultaneously:

Agent 1: Econometrics Audit Review all identification strategies (hedonic, repeat sales, long diff, DiD, upstream/downstream, dry spills). Cross-reference manuscript claims against analysis scripts. Weight: 30%

Agent 2: Code Review Review all scripts in scripts/R/09_analysis/ for code quality, reproducibility, and project convention compliance. Weight: 15%

Agent 3: Manuscript Proofread Review all .tex files for structure, claims-evidence alignment, identification fidelity, writing quality, grammar, and LaTeX compilation. Weight: 35%

Agent 4: Bibliography Validation Cross-reference all citations against refs.bib. Check for missing entries, unused references, and quality issues. Weight: 5%

Step 3: Compute Weighted Aggregate Score

Overall = 0.30 × Econometrics + 0.15 × Code + 0.35 × Paper + 0.05 × Bibliography + 0.15 × Polish

Where Polish is derived from the Proofreader's writing quality subscore.

If components are missing (e.g. no manuscript sections yet), renormalise weights over available components.

Step 4: Present Results

# Paper Excellence Report: Sewage in Our Waters
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Aggregate Score:** XX/100

## Score Breakdown
| Component | Weight | Score | Issues | Source |
|-----------|--------|-------|--------|--------|
| Econometrics | 30% | XX | N | /econometrics-check |
| Code | 15% | XX | N | /review-r |
| Paper | 35% | XX | N | /proofread |
| Bibliography | 5% | XX | N | /validate-bib |
| Polish | 15% | XX | N | Writing quality subscore |

## Priority Fixes (Top 5)
1. **[CRITICAL]** [Most important issue]
2. **[MAJOR]** [Second priority]
3. ...

## Quality Gate
- Score >= 90: "Ready for submission."
- Score >= 80: "Commit-ready. Address major issues before submission."
- Score < 80: "Blocked. Must fix critical/major issues."

## Full Reports
- Econometrics: output/log/econometrics_check_all.md
- Code: output/log/code_review_all.md
- Proofread: output/log/proofread_report_all.md
- Bibliography: output/log/bib_validation.md

Save to output/log/paper_excellence_[date].md.

Principles

• Parallel execution. All agents run simultaneously for efficiency.
• Weighted aggregation. Not a simple average — econometrics and paper quality dominate.
• Don't double-count. Same issue found by multiple agents counts once in priority list.
• One unified report. User sees one priority list, not separate reports.
• Proportional gating. Working papers get developmental feedback. Near-final manuscripts get submission-level scrutiny.