--- name: paper-spine description: Build, rewrite, audit, submit, revise, or transfer scholarly papers end to end, producing verified LaTeX/PDF/Word and target-specific publication packages. ---

# PaperSpine Orchestrator

Use this skill as the suite entrypoint. PaperSpine exposes one main skill: `paper-spine`. Each stage is executed by reading the corresponding playbook under `references/`.

**Update detection**: If the user asks to update, upgrade, check for updates, or configure automatic updates, read `references/update.md` and execute without starting intake or the writing workflow. Automatic updates are opt-in only.

## Command Routing

| Trigger | Read | |---|---| | Default / full workflow | This file (Non-Negotiable Route below) | | `resume` / `continue` / "continue from" | `references/resume.md` | | `update` / "check for updates" / 手动更新 | `references/update.md` | | `auto-update on|off|status` / 自动更新 | `references/update.md` | | `submission` / "submission materials" / delivery package | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/submission.md` | | `audit` | `references/audit.md` | | `translate` | `references/translate.md` | | `humanize` | `references/humanize.md` | | `respond` / `rebuttal` / minor or major revision | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/respond.md` | | rejection / resubmit / journal transfer / 转投 | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/journal-transfer.md` |

## Automatic Update Preflight

Before every normal workflow launch or resume, follow `references/update.md` and run the installed updater with `--auto`. The preflight is a local no-op unless the user has explicitly enabled automatic updates and the configured interval is due. Never enable it on the user's behalf.

If the preflight installs a new version, stop before intake/research/writing and ask the user to reload or restart the host, then invoke PaperSpine again. If the preflight fails, warn once and continue with the current installation; do not turn an update-network failure into a paper-workflow blocker.

For fine-grained stage execution, the orchestrator reads the playbook for each stage from `references/` rather than requiring a separate skill invocation:

| Stage | Playbook | |---|---| | Intake / config | `references/intake.md` | | Resume / checkpoint | `references/resume.md` | | Research | `references/research.md` | | Citation | `references/citation.md` | | Review policy / autonomy | `references/review-policy.md` | | Editorial completeness / manuscript scale | `references/editorial-completeness.md` | | Semantic confirmation | `references/semantic-confirmation.md` | | Contribution contract | `references/contribution.md` | | Rewrite | `references/rewrite.md` | | Build | `references/build.md` | | Results validation | `references/results-validation.md` | | Scientific evidence ledger | `references/scientific-evidence-ledger.md` | | Reviewer audit | `references/reviewer-audit.md` | | Humanize | `references/humanize.md` | | Reader-facing claim voice | `references/assertive-scientific-writing.md` | | LaTeX | `references/latex.md` | | Visual readiness | `references/visual-readiness-gate.md` | | Submission metadata | `references/submission-metadata.md` | | Publication surface | `references/publication-surface.md` | | Publication target profile | `references/publication-target-profile.md` | | Submission / revision / transfer cycle | `references/publication-cycle.md` | | Publication-cycle main-flow interface | `references/publication-cycle-interface.md` | | Journal transfer | `references/journal-transfer.md` | | Usage telemetry / phase receipts | `references/usage-telemetry.md`, `references/phase-contracts.md` | | Translate | `references/translate.md` | | Respond | `references/respond.md` | | Audit | `references/audit.md` |

Historical worker skill names (`paper-spine-research`, etc.) are legacy only and are not user entry points.

## Operating Principle

PaperSpine is a research-writing workflow, not a prose patcher. Its job is to learn the target scene and available evidence, confirm the controlling contribution and motivation, then give the writing Agent room to design the strongest argument and manuscript structure for the actual material.

Never fabricate data, metrics, p-values, datasets, citations, figures, or experimental claims. User materials are authoritative for this paper's results. External examples teach structure and rhetoric only.

Keep scientific boundaries explicit without repeating the full provenance disclaimer in every paragraph. Define stable evidence scope at the paper or section boundary, inherit it until the evidence changes, and restate only the exception. This preserves caution without defensive repetition.

Default to `review_policy=balanced`. Gates are decision aids, not a substitute for writing judgment. Hard-block fabricated facts/citations, unsupported primary claims, unresolved figure/text conflicts, broken citations, missing required metadata, and unusable deliverables. Treat stylistic preferences, literature breadth inside a declared closed corpus, optional planning forms, and minor review suggestions as advisory. Use `strict` only when the user requests it or the task is explicitly a submission/final-compliance audit. Read `references/review-policy.md` when selecting or changing this policy.

The internal evidence model may be precise; the manuscript should still sound like a confident scholarly article. Read `references/assertive-scientific-writing.md`: state supported results directly, reserve hedging for genuine uncertainty or causal/generalization boundaries, and do not repeat audit language in reader-facing prose.

## Editorial North Star

The manuscript is the product; plans, ledgers, reviews, and receipts exist only to help the Agent write it. A workflow is not complete merely because its internal artifacts pass. The final paper must let its intended reader follow one visible arc: why the work was needed, what was done, what the evidence shows, what those findings mean, and what conclusion the evidence earns.

Give the writing Agent freedom to choose section architecture, paragraph moves, emphasis, and revision order from the confirmed contribution, target venue, and available evidence. Guide with reader questions and editorial judgment rather than paragraph quotas or extra forms. Hard stops are reserved for truth, authorization, unresolved evidence/figure identity conflicts, and unusable deliverables.

`tier` changes research and process depth, never the promised manuscript scale. A `flash` journal paper is still a complete journal paper; it is not permission to omit the ending, compress Results into captions, or replace Discussion with an audit summary. Read `references/editorial-completeness.md` before drafting and again for the integrated editorial pass.

## Contribution-First, Reviewer-Aware Rules (V4)

These three rules sit above the motivation thread. Motivation remains required, but it supports the contribution rather than replacing it.

1. **Contribution-First.** The manuscript's highest-priority organizing unit is the confirmed contribution. Do not begin substantive writing until `confirmed_contribution.md` exists (what the paper adds, what problem/gap/ challenge makes it necessary, what evidence validates it, what claim boundary to respect, why a reviewer should find it publishable). Template + per-section checklists: `references/contribution.md`. Gate: `contribution_check.py`. 2. **Results-as-Validation.** Each major Results subsection must validate at least one contribution promise; metric-only units with no contribution mapping are a failure. Record this in `results_validation.md`. Template: `references/results-validation.md`. Gate: `results_validation_check.py` (journal / conference / competition scenes). 3. **Reviewer-Aware.** Before claiming submission-ready, create `reviewer_audit.md` (reviewer value map + objection register + editorial fit), populating the objection register from the three `structured_review` reviewer agents. Template: `references/reviewer-audit.md`. Gate: `reviewer_audit_check.py`.

The contribution check runs at semantic confirmation and again at planning; Results validation runs at planning before prose; reviewer audit runs before LaTeX assembly. Stage 12 re-runs all three as defense in depth. Final audit must never be the first place one of these failures is discovered.

## User-Facing Language

When the user writes in Chinese, `ui_language=zh`, `output_language=zh`, or `translation_package=zh`, all user-facing communication must be in Chinese throughout the whole run, not only in the final completion report. This includes intermediate progress updates, status bullets, tool-result summaries, blocked messages, gate re-run notes, final delivery tables, and error explanations.

Do not write English progress sentences such as "Chinese .docx generated", "Now writing the word report", "All stages passed", "Deliverables", or "PaperSpine Workflow Complete" in those Chinese-facing runs. Use Chinese status phrases instead, for example:

- `中文 Word 文档已生成：final_paper/paper.zh.docx。正在写入 Word 检查报告并重新运行关卡检查。` - `PaperSpine 工作流已完成` - `全部阶段已通过` - `交付文件清单`

Tool names, file paths, command names, and required English manuscript text may remain literal, but explanatory prose around them must be Chinese.

## Required Configuration

Prefer reading `paper_rewriting_output/paper_spine_config.json`. If it is missing, read `references/intake.md` and collect configuration.

Required fields:

| Field | Allowed Values | |---|---| | `workflow` | `rewrite_existing`, `build_from_materials` | | `scene` | `journal`, `conference`, `report_review`, `competition` | | `tier` | `flash`, `pro` (research/process depth only; never manuscript completeness) | | `output_language` | `en`, `zh` | | `target_name` | free text | | `materials_dir` | path or empty | | `draft_path` | path or empty | | `user_motivation` | free text or empty | | `official_urls` | list | | `special_requirements` | list | | `word_output` | `none`, `docx` | | `translation_package` | `none`, `zh` | | `reference_mode` | `local_first`, `specified_paths`, `web` | | `reference_paths` | list of local reference folders/files; default `["."]` | | `citation_target_count` | integer; default `20` | | `humanize_tier` | `none`, `light`, `medium`, `heavy` |

Optional policy fields (default without adding intake questions):

| Field | Allowed Values | |---|---| | `review_policy` | `balanced` (default), `strict` | | `literature_scope` | `auto` (default), `closed_corpus`, `open_literature` |

## Non-Negotiable Route

**Resume-first rule:** Before starting any workflow, read `references/resume.md` and run `progress_check.py` against `paper_rewriting_output/`. If earlier stages have produced valid artifacts, start from the first incomplete stage. After executing that stage, run its gate, run the full progress check again, and continue until final audit is complete. Do **not** restart from intake unless the user explicitly requests a clean run or the output directory is empty.

**Anti-skip rule:** Each stage is a gate. After completing a stage, run its gate check before moving to the next. If the gate fails, route back to that stage — do not skip, do not hand-write the missing artifact, do not patch downstream. The gate script is `progress_check.py --gate <stage_name>`. Never use bulk placeholder generators such as `generate_artifacts.py`, `quick_generate.py`, or `mock_artifacts.py` to replace real stage work.

**Default Word output:** Word (.docx) is a standard required artifact. Produce it in the LaTeX stage unless `word_output` is explicitly set to `none` in config. If pandoc is unavailable, write a BLOCKED/FAIL note in `latex_report.md` and do not declare completion.

---

### Stage 1 — Intake / Configuration

If configuration is missing or incomplete, run the terminal wizard from the intake UI via the absolute installed laun

--- name: paper-spine description: Build, rewrite, audit, submit, revise, or transfer scholarly papers end to end, producing verified LaTeX/PDF/Word and target-specific publication packages. ---

# PaperSpine Orchestrator

Use this skill as the suite entrypoint. PaperSpine exposes one main skill: `paper-spine`. Each stage is executed by reading the corresponding playbook under `references/`.

**Update detection**: If the user asks to update, upgrade, check for updates, or configure automatic updates, read `references/update.md` and execute without starting intake or the writing workflow. Automatic updates are opt-in only.

## Command Routing

| Trigger | Read | |---|---| | Default / full workflow | This file (Non-Negotiable Route below) | | `resume` / `continue` / "continue from" | `references/resume.md` | | `update` / "check for updates" / 手动更新 | `references/update.md` | | `auto-update on|off|status` / 自动更新 | `references/update.md` | | `submission` / "submission materials" / delivery package | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/submission.md` | | `audit` | `references/audit.md` | | `translate` | `references/translate.md` | | `humanize` | `references/humanize.md` | | `respond` / `rebuttal` / minor or major revision | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/respond.md` | | rejection / resubmit / journal transfer / 转投 | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/journal-transfer.md` |

## Automatic Update Preflight

Before every normal workflow launch or resume, follow `references/update.md` and run the installed updater with `--auto`. The preflight is a local no-op unless the user has explicitly enabled automatic updates and the configured interval is due. Never enable it on the user's behalf.

If the preflight installs a new version, stop before intake/research/writing and ask the user to reload or restart the host, then invoke PaperSpine again. If the preflight fails, warn once and continue with the current installation; do not turn an update-network failure into a paper-workflow blocker.

For fine-grained stage execution, the orchestrator reads the playbook for each stage from `references/` rather than requiring a separate skill invocation:

| Stage | Playbook | |---|---| | Intake / config | `references/intake.md` | | Resume / checkpoint | `references/resume.md` | | Research | `references/research.md` | | Citation | `references/citation.md` | | Review policy / autonomy | `references/review-policy.md` | | Editorial completeness / manuscript scale | `references/editorial-completeness.md` | | Semantic confirmation | `references/semantic-confirmation.md` | | Contribution contract | `references/contribution.md` | | Rewrite | `references/rewrite.md` | | Build | `references/build.md` | | Results validation | `references/results-validation.md` | | Scientific evidence ledger | `references/scientific-evidence-ledger.md` | | Reviewer audit | `references/reviewer-audit.md` | | Humanize | `references/humanize.md` | | Reader-facing claim voice | `references/assertive-scientific-writing.md` | | LaTeX | `references/latex.md` | | Visual readiness | `references/visual-readiness-gate.md` | | Submission metadata | `references/submission-metadata.md` | | Publication surface | `references/publication-surface.md` | | Publication target profile | `references/publication-target-profile.md` | | Submission / revision / transfer cycle | `references/publication-cycle.md` | | Publication-cycle main-flow interface | `references/publication-cycle-interface.md` | | Journal transfer | `references/journal-transfer.md` | | Usage telemetry / phase receipts | `references/usage-telemetry.md`, `references/phase-contracts.md` | | Translate | `references/translate.md` | | Respond | `references/respond.md` | | Audit | `references/audit.md` |

Historical worker skill names (`paper-spine-research`, etc.) are legacy only and are not user entry points.

## Operating Principle

PaperSpine is a research-writing workflow, not a prose patcher. Its job is to learn the target scene and available evidence, confirm the controlling contribution and motivation, then give the writing Agent room to design the strongest argument and manuscript structure for the actual material.

Never fabricate data, metrics, p-values, datasets, citations, figures, or experimental claims. User materials are authoritative for this paper's results. External examples teach structure and rhetoric only.

Keep scientific boundaries explicit without repeating the full provenance disclaimer in every paragraph. Define stable evidence scope at the paper or section boundary, inherit it until the evidence changes, and restate only the exception. This preserves caution without defensive repetition.

Default to `review_policy=balanced`. Gates are decision aids, not a substitute for writing judgment. Hard-block fabricated facts/citations, unsupported primary claims, unresolved figure/text conflicts, broken citations, missing required metadata, and unusable deliverables. Treat stylistic preferences, literature breadth inside a declared closed corpus, optional planning forms, and minor review suggestions as advisory. Use `strict` only when the user requests it or the task is explicitly a submission/final-compliance audit. Read `references/review-policy.md` when selecting or changing this policy.

The internal evidence model may be precise; the manuscript should still sound like a confident scholarly article. Read `references/assertive-scientific-writing.md`: state supported results directly, reserve hedging for genuine uncertainty or causal/generalization boundaries, and do not repeat audit language in reader-facing prose.

## Editorial North Star

The manuscript is the product; plans, ledgers, reviews, and receipts exist only to help the Agent write it. A workflow is not complete merely because its internal artifacts pass. The final paper must let its intended reader follow one visible arc: why the work was needed, what was done, what the evidence shows, what those findings mean, and what conclusion the evidence earns.

Give the writing Agent freedom to choose section architecture, paragraph moves, emphasis, and revision order from the confirmed contribution, target venue, and available evidence. Guide with reader questions and editorial judgment rather than paragraph quotas or extra forms. Hard stops are reserved for truth, authorization, unresolved evidence/figure identity conflicts, and unusable deliverables.

`tier` changes research and process depth, never the promised manuscript scale. A `flash` journal paper is still a complete journal paper; it is not permission to omit the ending, compress Results into captions, or replace Discussion with an audit summary. Read `references/editorial-completeness.md` before drafting and again for the integrated editorial pass.

## Contribution-First, Reviewer-Aware Rules (V4)

These three rules sit above the motivation thread. Motivation remains required, but it supports the contribution rather than replacing it.

1. **Contribution-First.** The manuscript's highest-priority organizing unit is the confirmed contribution. Do not begin substantive writing until `confirmed_contribution.md` exists (what the paper adds, what problem/gap/ challenge makes it necessary, what evidence validates it, what claim boundary to respect, why a reviewer should find it publishable). Template + per-section checklists: `references/contribution.md`. Gate: `contribution_check.py`. 2. **Results-as-Validation.** Each major Results subsection must validate at least one contribution promise; metric-only units with no contribution mapping are a failure. Record this in `results_validation.md`. Template: `references/results-validation.md`. Gate: `results_validation_check.py` (journal / conference / competition scenes). 3. **Reviewer-Aware.** Before claiming submission-ready, create `reviewer_audit.md` (reviewer value map + objection register + editorial fit), populating the objection register from the three `structured_review` reviewer agents. Template: `references/reviewer-audit.md`. Gate: `reviewer_audit_check.py`.

The contribution check runs at semantic confirmation and again at planning; Results validation runs at planning before prose; reviewer audit runs before LaTeX assembly. Stage 12 re-runs all three as defense in depth. Final audit must never be the first place one of these failures is discovered.

## User-Facing Language

When the user writes in Chinese, `ui_language=zh`, `output_language=zh`, or `translation_package=zh`, all user-facing communication must be in Chinese throughout the whole run, not only in the final completion report. This includes intermediate progress updates, status bullets, tool-result summaries, blocked messages, gate re-run notes, final delivery tables, and error explanations.

Do not write English progress sentences such as "Chinese .docx generated", "Now writing the word report", "All stages passed", "Deliverables", or "PaperSpine Workflow Complete" in those Chinese-facing runs. Use Chinese status phrases instead, for example:

- `中文 Word 文档已生成：final_paper/paper.zh.docx。正在写入 Word 检查报告并重新运行关卡检查。` - `PaperSpine 工作流已完成` - `全部阶段已通过` - `交付文件清单`

Tool names, file paths, command names, and required English manuscript text may remain literal, but explanatory prose around them must be Chinese.

## Required Configuration

Prefer reading `paper_rewriting_output/paper_spine_config.json`. If it is missing, read `references/intake.md` and collect configuration.

Required fields:

| Field | Allowed Values | |---|---| | `workflow` | `rewrite_existing`, `build_from_materials` | | `scene` | `journal`, `conference`, `report_review`, `competition` | | `tier` | `flash`, `pro` (research/process depth only; never manuscript completeness) | | `output_language` | `en`, `zh` | | `target_name` | free text | | `materials_dir` | path or empty | | `draft_path` | path or empty | | `user_motivation` | free text or empty | | `official_urls` | list | | `special_requirements` | list | | `word_output` | `none`, `docx` | | `translation_package` | `none`, `zh` | | `reference_mode` | `local_first`, `specified_paths`, `web` | | `reference_paths` | list of local reference folders/files; default `["."]` | | `citation_target_count` | integer; default `20` | | `humanize_tier` | `none`, `light`, `medium`, `heavy` |

Optional policy fields (default without adding intake questions):

| Field | Allowed Values | |---|---| | `review_policy` | `balanced` (default), `strict` | | `literature_scope` | `auto` (default), `closed_corpus`, `open_literature` |

## Non-Negotiable Route

**Resume-first rule:** Before starting any workflow, read `references/resume.md` and run `progress_check.py` against `paper_rewriting_output/`. If earlier stages have produced valid artifacts, start from the first incomplete stage. After executing that stage, run its gate, run the full progress check again, and continue until final audit is complete. Do **not** restart from intake unless the user explicitly requests a clean run or the output directory is empty.

**Anti-skip rule:** Each stage is a gate. After completing a stage, run its gate check before moving to the next. If the gate fails, route back to that stage — do not skip, do not hand-write the missing artifact, do not patch downstream. The gate script is `progress_check.py --gate <stage_name>`. Never use bulk placeholder generators such as `generate_artifacts.py`, `quick_generate.py`, or `mock_artifacts.py` to replace real stage work.

**Default Word output:** Word (.docx) is a standard required artifact. Produce it in the LaTeX stage unless `word_output` is explicitly set to `none` in config. If pandoc is unavailable, write a BLOCKED/FAIL note in `latex_report.md` and do not declare completion.

---

### Stage 1 — Intake / Configuration

If configuration is missing or incomplete, run the terminal wizard from the intake UI via the absolute installed laun

--- name: paper-spine description: Build, rewrite, audit, submit, revise, or transfer scholarly papers end to end, producing verified LaTeX/PDF/Word and target-specific publication packages. ---

# PaperSpine Orchestrator

Use this skill as the suite entrypoint. PaperSpine exposes one main skill: `paper-spine`. Each stage is executed by reading the corresponding playbook under `references/`.

**Update detection**: If the user asks to update, upgrade, check for updates, or configure automatic updates, read `references/update.md` and execute without starting intake or the writing workflow. Automatic updates are opt-in only.

## Command Routing

| Trigger | Read | |---|---| | Default / full workflow | This file (Non-Negotiable Route below) | | `resume` / `continue` / "continue from" | `references/resume.md` | | `update` / "check for updates" / 手动更新 | `references/update.md` | | `auto-update on|off|status` / 自动更新 | `references/update.md` | | `submission` / "submission materials" / delivery package | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/submission.md` | | `audit` | `references/audit.md` | | `translate` | `references/translate.md` | | `humanize` | `references/humanize.md` | | `respond` / `rebuttal` / minor or major revision | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/respond.md` | | rejection / resubmit / journal transfer / 转投 | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/journal-transfer.md` |

## Automatic Update Preflight

Before every normal workflow launch or resume, follow `references/update.md` and run the installed updater with `--auto`. The preflight is a local no-op unless the user has explicitly enabled automatic updates and the configured interval is due. Never enable it on the user's behalf.

If the preflight installs a new version, stop before intake/research/writing and ask the user to reload or restart the host, then invoke PaperSpine again. If the preflight fails, warn once and continue with the current installation; do not turn an update-network failure into a paper-workflow blocker.

For fine-grained stage execution, the orchestrator reads the playbook for each stage from `references/` rather than requiring a separate skill invocation:

| Stage | Playbook | |---|---| | Intake / config | `references/intake.md` | | Resume / checkpoint | `references/resume.md` | | Research | `references/research.md` | | Citation | `references/citation.md` | | Review policy / autonomy | `references/review-policy.md` | | Editorial completeness / manuscript scale | `references/editorial-completeness.md` | | Semantic confirmation | `references/semantic-confirmation.md` | | Contribution contract | `references/contribution.md` | | Rewrite | `references/rewrite.md` | | Build | `references/build.md` | | Results validation | `references/results-validation.md` | | Scientific evidence ledger | `references/scientific-evidence-ledger.md` | | Reviewer audit | `references/reviewer-audit.md` | | Humanize | `references/humanize.md` | | Reader-facing claim voice | `references/assertive-scientific-writing.md` | | LaTeX | `references/latex.md` | | Visual readiness | `references/visual-readiness-gate.md` | | Submission metadata | `references/submission-metadata.md` | | Publication surface | `references/publication-surface.md` | | Publication target profile | `references/publication-target-profile.md` | | Submission / revision / transfer cycle | `references/publication-cycle.md` | | Publication-cycle main-flow interface | `references/publication-cycle-interface.md` | | Journal transfer | `references/journal-transfer.md` | | Usage telemetry / phase receipts | `references/usage-telemetry.md`, `references/phase-contracts.md` | | Translate | `references/translate.md` | | Respond | `references/respond.md` | | Audit | `references/audit.md` |

Historical worker skill names (`paper-spine-research`, etc.) are legacy only and are not user entry points.

## Operating Principle

PaperSpine is a research-writing workflow, not a prose patcher. Its job is to learn the target scene and available evidence, confirm the controlling contribution and motivation, then give the writing Agent room to design the strongest argument and manuscript structure for the actual material.

Never fabricate data, metrics, p-values, datasets, citations, figures, or experimental claims. User materials are authoritative for this paper's results. External examples teach structure and rhetoric only.

Keep scientific boundaries explicit without repeating the full provenance disclaimer in every paragraph. Define stable evidence scope at the paper or section boundary, inherit it until the evidence changes, and restate only the exception. This preserves caution without defensive repetition.

Default to `review_policy=balanced`. Gates are decision aids, not a substitute for writing judgment. Hard-block fabricated facts/citations, unsupported primary claims, unresolved figure/text conflicts, broken citations, missing required metadata, and unusable deliverables. Treat stylistic preferences, literature breadth inside a declared closed corpus, optional planning forms, and minor review suggestions as advisory. Use `strict` only when the user requests it or the task is explicitly a submission/final-compliance audit. Read `references/review-policy.md` when selecting or changing this policy.

The internal evidence model may be precise; the manuscript should still sound like a confident scholarly article. Read `references/assertive-scientific-writing.md`: state supported results directly, reserve hedging for genuine uncertainty or causal/generalization boundaries, and do not repeat audit language in reader-facing prose.

## Editorial North Star

The manuscript is the product; plans, ledgers, reviews, and receipts exist only to help the Agent write it. A workflow is not complete merely because its internal artifacts pass. The final paper must let its intended reader follow one visible arc: why the work was needed, what was done, what the evidence shows, what those findings mean, and what conclusion the evidence earns.

Give the writing Agent freedom to choose section architecture, paragraph moves, emphasis, and revision order from the confirmed contribution, target venue, and available evidence. Guide with reader questions and editorial judgment rather than paragraph quotas or extra forms. Hard stops are reserved for truth, authorization, unresolved evidence/figure identity conflicts, and unusable deliverables.

`tier` changes research and process depth, never the promised manuscript scale. A `flash` journal paper is still a complete journal paper; it is not permission to omit the ending, compress Results into captions, or replace Discussion with an audit summary. Read `references/editorial-completeness.md` before drafting and again for the integrated editorial pass.

## Contribution-First, Reviewer-Aware Rules (V4)

These three rules sit above the motivation thread. Motivation remains required, but it supports the contribution rather than replacing it.

1. **Contribution-First.** The manuscript's highest-priority organizing unit is the confirmed contribution. Do not begin substantive writing until `confirmed_contribution.md` exists (what the paper adds, what problem/gap/ challenge makes it necessary, what evidence validates it, what claim boundary to respect, why a reviewer should find it publishable). Template + per-section checklists: `references/contribution.md`. Gate: `contribution_check.py`. 2. **Results-as-Validation.** Each major Results subsection must validate at least one contribution promise; metric-only units with no contribution mapping are a failure. Record this in `results_validation.md`. Template: `references/results-validation.md`. Gate: `results_validation_check.py` (journal / conference / competition scenes). 3. **Reviewer-Aware.** Before claiming submission-ready, create `reviewer_audit.md` (reviewer value map + objection register + editorial fit), populating the objection register from the three `structured_review` reviewer agents. Template: `references/reviewer-audit.md`. Gate: `reviewer_audit_check.py`.

The contribution check runs at semantic confirmation and again at planning; Results validation runs at planning before prose; reviewer audit runs before LaTeX assembly. Stage 12 re-runs all three as defense in depth. Final audit must never be the first place one of these failures is discovered.

## User-Facing Language

When the user writes in Chinese, `ui_language=zh`, `output_language=zh`, or `translation_package=zh`, all user-facing communication must be in Chinese throughout the whole run, not only in the final completion report. This includes intermediate progress updates, status bullets, tool-result summaries, blocked messages, gate re-run notes, final delivery tables, and error explanations.

Do not write English progress sentences such as "Chinese .docx generated", "Now writing the word report", "All stages passed", "Deliverables", or "PaperSpine Workflow Complete" in those Chinese-facing runs. Use Chinese status phrases instead, for example:

- `中文 Word 文档已生成：final_paper/paper.zh.docx。正在写入 Word 检查报告并重新运行关卡检查。` - `PaperSpine 工作流已完成` - `全部阶段已通过` - `交付文件清单`

Tool names, file paths, command names, and required English manuscript text may remain literal, but explanatory prose around them must be Chinese.

## Required Configuration

Prefer reading `paper_rewriting_output/paper_spine_config.json`. If it is missing, read `references/intake.md` and collect configuration.

Required fields:

| Field | Allowed Values | |---|---| | `workflow` | `rewrite_existing`, `build_from_materials` | | `scene` | `journal`, `conference`, `report_review`, `competition` | | `tier` | `flash`, `pro` (research/process depth only; never manuscript completeness) | | `output_language` | `en`, `zh` | | `target_name` | free text | | `materials_dir` | path or empty | | `draft_path` | path or empty | | `user_motivation` | free text or empty | | `official_urls` | list | | `special_requirements` | list | | `word_output` | `none`, `docx` | | `translation_package` | `none`, `zh` | | `reference_mode` | `local_first`, `specified_paths`, `web` | | `reference_paths` | list of local reference folders/files; default `["."]` | | `citation_target_count` | integer; default `20` | | `humanize_tier` | `none`, `light`, `medium`, `heavy` |

Optional policy fields (default without adding intake questions):

| Field | Allowed Values | |---|---| | `review_policy` | `balanced` (default), `strict` | | `literature_scope` | `auto` (default), `closed_corpus`, `open_literature` |

## Non-Negotiable Route

**Resume-first rule:** Before starting any workflow, read `references/resume.md` and run `progress_check.py` against `paper_rewriting_output/`. If earlier stages have produced valid artifacts, start from the first incomplete stage. After executing that stage, run its gate, run the full progress check again, and continue until final audit is complete. Do **not** restart from intake unless the user explicitly requests a clean run or the output directory is empty.

**Anti-skip rule:** Each stage is a gate. After completing a stage, run its gate check before moving to the next. If the gate fails, route back to that stage — do not skip, do not hand-write the missing artifact, do not patch downstream. The gate script is `progress_check.py --gate <stage_name>`. Never use bulk placeholder generators such as `generate_artifacts.py`, `quick_generate.py`, or `mock_artifacts.py` to replace real stage work.

**Default Word output:** Word (.docx) is a standard required artifact. Produce it in the LaTeX stage unless `word_output` is explicitly set to `none` in config. If pandoc is unavailable, write a BLOCKED/FAIL note in `latex_report.md` and do not declare completion.

---

### Stage 1 — Intake / Configuration

If configuration is missing or incomplete, run the terminal wizard from the intake UI via the absolute installed laun

--- name: paper-spine description: Build, rewrite, audit, submit, revise, or transfer scholarly papers end to end, producing verified LaTeX/PDF/Word and target-specific publication packages. ---

# PaperSpine Orchestrator

Use this skill as the suite entrypoint. PaperSpine exposes one main skill: `paper-spine`. Each stage is executed by reading the corresponding playbook under `references/`.

**Update detection**: If the user asks to update, upgrade, check for updates, or configure automatic updates, read `references/update.md` and execute without starting intake or the writing workflow. Automatic updates are opt-in only.

## Command Routing

| Trigger | Read | |---|---| | Default / full workflow | This file (Non-Negotiable Route below) | | `resume` / `continue` / "continue from" | `references/resume.md` | | `update` / "check for updates" / 手动更新 | `references/update.md` | | `auto-update on|off|status` / 自动更新 | `references/update.md` | | `submission` / "submission materials" / delivery package | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/submission.md` | | `audit` | `references/audit.md` | | `translate` | `references/translate.md` | | `humanize` | `references/humanize.md` | | `respond` / `rebuttal` / minor or major revision | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/respond.md` | | rejection / resubmit / journal transfer / 转投 | `references/publication-cycle.md`, then `references/journal-transfer.md` |

## Automatic Update Preflight

Before every normal workflow launch or resume, follow `references/update.md` and run the installed updater with `--auto`. The preflight is a local no-op unless the user has explicitly enabled automatic updates and the configured interval is due. Never enable it on the user's behalf.

If the preflight installs a new version, stop before intake/research/writing and ask the user to reload or restart the host, then invoke PaperSpine again. If the preflight fails, warn once and continue with the current installation; do not turn an update-network failure into a paper-workflow blocker.

For fine-grained stage execution, the orchestrator reads the playbook for each stage from `references/` rather than requiring a separate skill invocation:

| Stage | Playbook | |---|---| | Intake / config | `references/intake.md` | | Resume / checkpoint | `references/resume.md` | | Research | `references/research.md` | | Citation | `references/citation.md` | | Review policy / autonomy | `references/review-policy.md` | | Editorial completeness / manuscript scale | `references/editorial-completeness.md` | | Semantic confirmation | `references/semantic-confirmation.md` | | Contribution contract | `references/contribution.md` | | Rewrite | `references/rewrite.md` | | Build | `references/build.md` | | Results validation | `references/results-validation.md` | | Scientific evidence ledger | `references/scientific-evidence-ledger.md` | | Reviewer audit | `references/reviewer-audit.md` | | Humanize | `references/humanize.md` | | Reader-facing claim voice | `references/assertive-scientific-writing.md` | | LaTeX | `references/latex.md` | | Visual readiness | `references/visual-readiness-gate.md` | | Submission metadata | `references/submission-metadata.md` | | Publication surface | `references/publication-surface.md` | | Publication target profile | `references/publication-target-profile.md` | | Submission / revision / transfer cycle | `references/publication-cycle.md` | | Publication-cycle main-flow interface | `references/publication-cycle-interface.md` | | Journal transfer | `references/journal-transfer.md` | | Usage telemetry / phase receipts | `references/usage-telemetry.md`, `references/phase-contracts.md` | | Translate | `references/translate.md` | | Respond | `references/respond.md` | | Audit | `references/audit.md` |

Historical worker skill names (`paper-spine-research`, etc.) are legacy only and are not user entry points.

## Operating Principle

PaperSpine is a research-writing workflow, not a prose patcher. Its job is to learn the target scene and available evidence, confirm the controlling contribution and motivation, then give the writing Agent room to design the strongest argument and manuscript structure for the actual material.

Never fabricate data, metrics, p-values, datasets, citations, figures, or experimental claims. User materials are authoritative for this paper's results. External examples teach structure and rhetoric only.

Keep scientific boundaries explicit without repeating the full provenance disclaimer in every paragraph. Define stable evidence scope at the paper or section boundary, inherit it until the evidence changes, and restate only the exception. This preserves caution without defensive repetition.

Default to `review_policy=balanced`. Gates are decision aids, not a substitute for writing judgment. Hard-block fabricated facts/citations, unsupported primary claims, unresolved figure/text conflicts, broken citations, missing required metadata, and unusable deliverables. Treat stylistic preferences, literature breadth inside a declared closed corpus, optional planning forms, and minor review suggestions as advisory. Use `strict` only when the user requests it or the task is explicitly a submission/final-compliance audit. Read `references/review-policy.md` when selecting or changing this policy.

The internal evidence model may be precise; the manuscript should still sound like a confident scholarly article. Read `references/assertive-scientific-writing.md`: state supported results directly, reserve hedging for genuine uncertainty or causal/generalization boundaries, and do not repeat audit language in reader-facing prose.

## Editorial North Star

The manuscript is the product; plans, ledgers, reviews, and receipts exist only to help the Agent write it. A workflow is not complete merely because its internal artifacts pass. The final paper must let its intended reader follow one visible arc: why the work was needed, what was done, what the evidence shows, what those findings mean, and what conclusion the evidence earns.

Give the writing Agent freedom to choose section architecture, paragraph moves, emphasis, and revision order from the confirmed contribution, target venue, and available evidence. Guide with reader questions and editorial judgment rather than paragraph quotas or extra forms. Hard stops are reserved for truth, authorization, unresolved evidence/figure identity conflicts, and unusable deliverables.

`tier` changes research and process depth, never the promised manuscript scale. A `flash` journal paper is still a complete journal paper; it is not permission to omit the ending, compress Results into captions, or replace Discussion with an audit summary. Read `references/editorial-completeness.md` before drafting and again for the integrated editorial pass.

## Contribution-First, Reviewer-Aware Rules (V4)

These three rules sit above the motivation thread. Motivation remains required, but it supports the contribution rather than replacing it.

1. **Contribution-First.** The manuscript's highest-priority organizing unit is the confirmed contribution. Do not begin substantive writing until `confirmed_contribution.md` exists (what the paper adds, what problem/gap/ challenge makes it necessary, what evidence validates it, what claim boundary to respect, why a reviewer should find it publishable). Template + per-section checklists: `references/contribution.md`. Gate: `contribution_check.py`. 2. **Results-as-Validation.** Each major Results subsection must validate at least one contribution promise; metric-only units with no contribution mapping are a failure. Record this in `results_validation.md`. Template: `references/results-validation.md`. Gate: `results_validation_check.py` (journal / conference / competition scenes). 3. **Reviewer-Aware.** Before claiming submission-ready, create `reviewer_audit.md` (reviewer value map + objection register + editorial fit), populating the objection register from the three `structured_review` reviewer agents. Template: `references/reviewer-audit.md`. Gate: `reviewer_audit_check.py`.

The contribution check runs at semantic confirmation and again at planning; Results validation runs at planning before prose; reviewer audit runs before LaTeX assembly. Stage 12 re-runs all three as defense in depth. Final audit must never be the first place one of these failures is discovered.

## User-Facing Language

When the user writes in Chinese, `ui_language=zh`, `output_language=zh`, or `translation_package=zh`, all user-facing communication must be in Chinese throughout the whole run, not only in the final completion report. This includes intermediate progress updates, status bullets, tool-result summaries, blocked messages, gate re-run notes, final delivery tables, and error explanations.

Do not write English progress sentences such as "Chinese .docx generated", "Now writing the word report", "All stages passed", "Deliverables", or "PaperSpine Workflow Complete" in those Chinese-facing runs. Use Chinese status phrases instead, for example:

- `中文 Word 文档已生成：final_paper/paper.zh.docx。正在写入 Word 检查报告并重新运行关卡检查。` - `PaperSpine 工作流已完成` - `全部阶段已通过` - `交付文件清单`

Tool names, file paths, command names, and required English manuscript text may remain literal, but explanatory prose around them must be Chinese.

## Required Configuration

Prefer reading `paper_rewriting_output/paper_spine_config.json`. If it is missing, read `references/intake.md` and collect configuration.

Required fields:

| Field | Allowed Values | |---|---| | `workflow` | `rewrite_existing`, `build_from_materials` | | `scene` | `journal`, `conference`, `report_review`, `competition` | | `tier` | `flash`, `pro` (research/process depth only; never manuscript completeness) | | `output_language` | `en`, `zh` | | `target_name` | free text | | `materials_dir` | path or empty | | `draft_path` | path or empty | | `user_motivation` | free text or empty | | `official_urls` | list | | `special_requirements` | list | | `word_output` | `none`, `docx` | | `translation_package` | `none`, `zh` | | `reference_mode` | `local_first`, `specified_paths`, `web` | | `reference_paths` | list of local reference folders/files; default `["."]` | | `citation_target_count` | integer; default `20` | | `humanize_tier` | `none`, `light`, `medium`, `heavy` |

Optional policy fields (default without adding intake questions):

| Field | Allowed Values | |---|---| | `review_policy` | `balanced` (default), `strict` | | `literature_scope` | `auto` (default), `closed_corpus`, `open_literature` |

## Non-Negotiable Route

**Resume-first rule:** Before starting any workflow, read `references/resume.md` and run `progress_check.py` against `paper_rewriting_output/`. If earlier stages have produced valid artifacts, start from the first incomplete stage. After executing that stage, run its gate, run the full progress check again, and continue until final audit is complete. Do **not** restart from intake unless the user explicitly requests a clean run or the output directory is empty.

**Anti-skip rule:** Each stage is a gate. After completing a stage, run its gate check before moving to the next. If the gate fails, route back to that stage — do not skip, do not hand-write the missing artifact, do not patch downstream. The gate script is `progress_check.py --gate <stage_name>`. Never use bulk placeholder generators such as `generate_artifacts.py`, `quick_generate.py`, or `mock_artifacts.py` to replace real stage work.

**Default Word output:** Word (.docx) is a standard required artifact. Produce it in the LaTeX stage unless `word_output` is explicitly set to `none` in config. If pandoc is unavailable, write a BLOCKED/FAIL note in `latex_report.md` and do not declare completion.

---

### Stage 1 — Intake / Configuration

If configuration is missing or incomplete, run the terminal wizard from the intake UI via the absolute installed laun