Academic Paper

Academic Paper — Academic Paper Writing Agent Team

A general-purpose academic paper writing tool — 12-agent pipeline covering all disciplines, with higher education domain as the default reference.

v2.5 adds two writing quality features:

• Style Calibration (intake Step 10, optional) — Provide 3+ past papers and the pipeline learns your writing voice (sentence rhythm, vocabulary preferences, citation integration style). Applied as a soft guide during drafting; discipline conventions always take priority. See shared/style_calibration_protocol.md.
• Writing Quality Check (references/writing_quality_check.md) — A writing quality checklist applied during the draft self-review step. Catches overused AI-typical terms, em dash overuse, throat-clearing openers, uniform paragraph lengths, and monotonous sentence rhythm. These are good writing rules, not detection evasion.

Quick Start

Minimal command:

Write a paper on the impact of AI on higher education quality assurance

Write a paper on the impact of declining birth rates on private university management strategies

Execution flow:

1. Configuration interview — paper type, discipline, citation format, output format
2. Literature search — systematic search strategy, source screening
3. Architecture design — paper structure, outline, word count allocation
4. Argumentation construction — claim-evidence chains, logical flow
5. Full-text drafting — section-by-section draft, register adjustment
6. Citation compliance + bilingual abstract (parallel)
7. Peer review — five-dimension scoring, revision suggestions
8. Output formatting — LaTeX/DOCX (via Pandoc)/PDF/Markdown

---

Trigger Conditions

Trigger Keywords

English: write paper, academic paper, paper outline, write abstract, revise paper, literature review paper, check citations, convert to LaTeX, convert format, format paper, conference paper, journal article, thesis chapter, research paper, guide my paper, help me plan my paper, step by step paper, draft manuscript, write methodology, write discussion, parse reviews, revision roadmap, help me with my revision, I got reviewer comments, convert citations

繁體中文: 寫論文, 學術論文, 論文大綱, 寫摘要, 修改論文, 文獻回顧論文, 檢查引用, 轉 LaTeX, 轉換格式, 研討會論文, 期刊文章, 學位論文, 研究論文, 引導我寫論文, 幫我規劃論文, 逐步寫論文, 寫方法論, 寫討論, 審查意見, 修訂路線圖, 幫我修改, 我收到審查意見, 轉換引用格式

Plan Mode Activation

Activate plan mode when the user wants guidance, step-by-step planning, or expresses uncertainty about paper structure. Default rule: when ambiguous between plan and full, prefer plan.

> See references/plan_mode_protocol.md for full intent signals and activation rules.

Does NOT Trigger

| Scenario | Use Instead | |----------|-------------| | Deep research / fact-checking (not paper writing) | deep-research | | Reviewing a paper (structured review) | academic-paper-reviewer | | Full research-to-paper pipeline | academic-pipeline |

Distinction from deep-research

| Feature | academic-paper | deep-research | |---------|-------------------|-----------------| | Primary output | Publishable paper draft | Research report | | Structure | Journal-ready (IMRaD, etc.) | APA 7.0 report | | Citation | Multi-format (APA/Chicago/MLA/IEEE/Vancouver) | APA 7.0 only | | Abstract | Bilingual (zh-TW + EN) | Single language | | Peer review | Simulated 5-dimension review | Editorial review | | Output format | LaTeX/DOCX (via Pandoc)/PDF/Markdown | Markdown only | | Revision loop | Max 2 rounds with targeted feedback | Max 2 rounds |

---

Agent Team (12 Agents)

| # | Agent | Role | Phase | |---|-------|------|-------| | 1 | intake_agent | Configuration interview: paper type, discipline, journal, citation format, output format, language, word count; Handoff detection; Plan mode simplified interview | Phase 0 | | 2 | literature_strategist_agent | Search strategy design, source screening, annotated bibliography, literature matrix | Phase 1 | | 3 | structure_architect_agent | Paper structure selection, detailed outline, word count allocation, evidence mapping | Phase 2 | | 4 | argument_builder_agent | Argument construction, claim-evidence chains, logical flow, counter-argument handling; Plan mode argument stress test | Phase 3 / Plan Step 3 | | 5 | draft_writer_agent | Section-by-section full draft writing, discipline register adjustment, word count tracking | Phase 4 | | 6 | citation_compliance_agent | Citation format verification, reference list completeness, DOI checking | Phase 5a | | 7 | abstract_bilingual_agent | Bilingual abstract (zh-TW + EN), 5-7 keywords each | Phase 5b | | 8 | peer_reviewer_agent | Simulated double-blind review, five-dimension scoring, revision suggestions (max 2 rounds) | Phase 6 | | 9 | formatter_agent | Convert to LaTeX/DOCX (via Pandoc)/PDF/Markdown, journal formatting, cover letter, citation format conversion (APA 7 / Chicago / MLA / IEEE / Vancouver) | Phase 7 | | 10 | socratic_mentor_agent | Plan mode Socratic mentor: chapter-by-chapter guidance, convergence criteria (4 signals), question taxonomy (4 types), INSIGHT extraction | Plan Step 0-3 | | 11 | visualization_agent | Parse paper data and generate publication-quality figure code (Python matplotlib / R ggplot2) with APA 7.0 formatting, colorblind-safe palettes, and LaTeX integration | Phase 4 / Phase 7 | | 12 | revision_coach_agent | Parse unstructured reviewer comments into structured Revision Roadmap; classify, map, and prioritize comments; works standalone without prior pipeline execution | Revision-Coach mode |

---

Output Formats

Text Formats

LaTeX (.tex + .bib), DOCX (via Pandoc), PDF (via LaTeX or Pandoc), Markdown.

Figures

When the paper contains quantitative results, the visualization_agent can generate publication-ready figures in Python (matplotlib/seaborn) or R (ggplot2) with APA 7.0 formatting and colorblind-safe palettes. Figures are delivered as runnable code + LaTeX \includegraphics integration code. See references/statistical_visualization_standards.md for chart type decision trees and code templates.

Citation Formats

APA 7.0 (default), Chicago (Author-Date or Notes-Bibliography), MLA 9, IEEE, Vancouver. The formatter_agent supports late-stage citation format conversion between any two supported formats via "Convert citations to [format]".

---

Orchestration Workflow (8 Phases)

Phase 0: CONFIG        -> [intake_agent]              -> Paper Configuration Record
Phase 1: RESEARCH      -> [literature_strategist]      -> Search Strategy + Source Corpus
Phase 2: ARCHITECTURE  -> [structure_architect]        -> Paper Outline + Evidence Map
Phase 3: ARGUMENTATION -> [argument_builder]           -> Argument Blueprint
Phase 4: DRAFTING      -> [draft_writer]               -> Complete Draft
Phase 5a: CITATIONS    -> [citation_compliance] ──┐    -> Citation Audit Report
Phase 5b: ABSTRACT     -> [abstract_bilingual]   ─┘    -> Bilingual Abstract + Keywords  (parallel)
Phase 6: PEER REVIEW   -> [peer_reviewer]              -> Review Report (max 2 revision loops)
Phase 7: FORMAT        -> [formatter]                  -> Final Output Package

> See references/workflow_phase_details.md for detailed per-phase agent behavior and output descriptions.

Checkpoint Rules

1. ⚠️ IRON RULE: User must confirm Paper Configuration Record before proceeding to Phase 1
2. Phase 2 -> 3: User must approve outline (can request restructuring)
3. ⚠️ IRON RULE: Max 2 revision loops; unresolved items -> "Acknowledged Limitations"
4. Peer Review Critical-severity issues block progression to Phase 7
5. User can skip Phase 1 (literature) if providing own sources

---

> v3.4.0 compliance (applies to full mode): Before finalization, compliance_agent runs RAISE principles-only check (warn-only; primary research is outside PRISMA-trAIce scope). Warnings are listed in the disclosure statement but never block the pipeline. See shared/raise_framework.md §Scope disclaimer.

v3.6.6 Generator-Evaluator Contract Protocol

> Authoritative orchestration block for the v3.6.6 contract-gated phase splits inside academic-paper full mode. Schema 13.1 since v3.6.6 (shared/sprint_contract.schema.json). Templates: shared/contracts/writer/full.json + shared/contracts/evaluator/full.json. Design spec: docs/design/2026-04-27-ars-v3.6.6-generator-evaluator-contract-design.md §5. > > Applies to academic-paper full mode only. Nine non-full modes (plan, outline-only, revision, revision-coach, abstract-only, lit-review, format-convert, citation-check, disclosure) are byte-equivalent across v3.6.5 → v3.6.6 and do not invoke this protocol. Pipeline boundary unchanged: academic-pipeline Stage 2 dispatches academic-paper in plan or full mode (full only invokes this protocol); Stage 3 dispatches the separate academic-paper-reviewer skill (5-panel external editorial review). The in-pair Phase 6 evaluator under this protocol and the Stage 3 reviewer are different review layers — see design doc §5.1 audit conclusion 2.

Overview

v3.6.6 splits Phase 4 (writer drafting) and Phase 6 (in-pair evaluator review) into paper-blind / paper-visible call pairs gated by the writer_full and evaluator_full contracts. The split mirrors academic-paper-reviewer/references/sprint_contract_protocol.md (the v3.6.2 reviewer pattern) but adapts it for single-agent generator modes that have no panel and (for the writer) no scoring_plan.

The load-bearing mechanism is the physical separation of calls: writer Phase 4a never sees the runtime drafting artefacts; evaluator Phase 6a never sees the writer Phase 4b draft. This destroys the "read the paper, then rationalise the standard" drift path on the in-pair self-quality gate.

Four-call structure

For each academic-paper full invocation, Phase 4 + Phase 6 expand from two single calls into four separate model calls. Each call has its own system prompt and user content per the system-vs-user content discipline below.

1. Phase 4a — writer paper-blind pre-commitment.

• System prompt: ### Phase 4a — Writer paper-blind pre-commitment sub-section in academic-paper/agents/draft_writer_agent.md § "v3.6.6 Generator-Evaluator Contract Protocol".
• User content: writer_full contract JSON + paper metadata only (title, field, word_count).
• Output: ## Acceptance Criteria Paraphrase section + terminal [PRE-COMMITMENT-ACKNOWLEDGED] tag.
• Lint: 3 structural checks (see § "Phase 4a / 6a output lint" below).

1. Phase 4b — writer paper-visible drafting + self-scoring.

• System prompt: ### Phase 4b — Writer paper-visible drafting + self-scoring sub-section in the same agent file.
• User content: writer_full contract JSON (re-injected) + Phase 4a output wrapped in ... data delimiter + upstream drafting artefacts (Paper Configuration Record, Paper Outline, Argument Blueprint, Annotated Bibliography, optional Style Profile, optional Knowledge Isolation Directive).
• Output: ## Draft Body → ## Dimension Scores → ## Failure Condition Checks → ## Writer Decision.
• Lint: 4 structural checks (see § "Phase 4b / 6b output lint" below).

1. Phase 6a — evaluator paper-blind pre-commitment.

• System prompt: ### Phase 6a — Evaluator paper-blind pre-commitment sub-section in academic-paper/agents/peer_reviewer_agent.md § "v3.6.6 Generator-Evaluator Contract Protocol".
• User content: evaluator_full contract JSON + paper metadata + the writer's most recent ` (the writer artefact the evaluator must verify per disagreementhandling.precommitmentcheckprotocol.checkwriterartifact`).
• Output: ## Contract Paraphrase + ## Scoring Plan (per-dimension dimension_id / what_to_look_for / what_triggers_block / what_triggers_warn) + terminal [PRE-COMMITMENT-ACKNOWLEDGED] tag.
• Lint: 5 structural checks.

1. Phase 6b — evaluator paper-visible scoring + decision.

• System prompt: ### Phase 6b — Evaluator paper-visible scoring + decision sub-section in the same agent file.
• User content: evaluator_full contract JSON (re-injected) + Phase 6a output wrapped in ... + the writer's ` (unconditional per precommitmentcheckprotocol.checkwriter_artifact`) + the writer Phase 4b draft (the artefact under review).
• Output: ## Dimension Scores → ## Failure Condition Checks → ## Review Body → ## Evaluator Decision.
• Lint: 5 structural checks.

System prompt vs user content discipline

Mirrors sprint_contract_protocol.md §2 reviewer pattern verbatim:

• System prompt carries invariant policy text only: the phase sub-section instructions from the agent file's ## v3.6.6 Generator-Evaluator Contract Protocol block, the lint description, and the phase-boundary tag conventions.
• User content carries the contract JSON (re-injected per call) plus the runtime inputs allowed at that phase: paper metadata, ` / ` delimiter blocks, upstream drafting artefacts, the paper draft.

All dynamic LLM output (Phase Na runtime emissions, paper content) lives in user content via data delimiters, never in the system prompt. This prevents accidental elevation of dynamic per-paper content into the invariant policy surface.

Schema field name vs runtime emission distinction

pre_commitment_artifacts (snakecase, backticks) is the schema field name in shared/sprint_contract.schema.json — a configuration declaration in the frozen contract baseline. The "writer Phase 4a pre-commitment output" is the runtime emission — the actual Markdown text the writer agent emits in Phase 4a. The runtime emission lives inside ` and gets handed off to Phase 4b / Phase 6a / Phase 6b. Same pattern for disagreementhandling` (schema field) vs "evaluator Phase 6a pre-commitment output" (runtime emission). Mixing the two leads to confusion between contract baseline configuration and LLM-generated content.

Phase 4a / 6a output lint

Mode-specific structural check counts, per sprint_contract_protocol.md §4 enumeration convention:

• Writer Phase 4a (3 checks): required sections in order (## Acceptance Criteria Paraphrase, terminal [PRE-COMMITMENT-ACKNOWLEDGED]); paraphrase paragraph count ≥ pre_commitment_artifacts.acceptance_criteria_paraphrase.minimum_dimensions; Phase 4a content references contract JSON + paper metadata only. No ## Scoring Plan section — writer_full carries no scoring_plan.
• Evaluator Phase 6a (5 checks): required sections in order (## Contract Paraphrase, ## Scoring Plan, terminal [PRE-COMMITMENT-ACKNOWLEDGED]); paraphrase paragraph count ≥ disagreement_handling.paraphrase_minimum_dimensions; one ### : subsection per acceptance dimension; each scoring_plan subsection contains disagreement_handling.scoring_plan.per_dimension_criteria four-field shape (dimension_id, what_to_look_for, what_triggers_block, what_triggers_warn); Phase 6a content references contract JSON + paper metadata + the writer's `` only (no full draft / paper content).

Retry semantics: lint failure on the first attempt → retry once with the specific lint gap hinted in the system prompt; second failure → mark this role unusable per § "Single-agent generator unusable handling" below.

Phase 4b / 6b output lint

• Writer Phase 4b (4 checks): required sections in order — ## Draft Body, ## Dimension Scores, ## Failure Condition Checks, ## Writer Decision; Dimension Scores one-to-one across the seven writer dimensions D1–D7 (per shared/contracts/writer/full.json); Failure Condition Checks one-to-one across F1 / F4 / F2 / F3 / F0; Writer Decision derivable from F-condition severity precedence. No multi-dissent retry (writer has no scoringplan to dissent against). No consistency check (writer Phase 4a emits no scoringplan trigger tokens).
• Evaluator Phase 6b (5 checks): required sections in order — `## Dimension

…

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

• Author: LUNARTECH-X
• Source: LUNARTECH-X/superpowers
• License: MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.