Manuscript Cycle

Core Rule

Run the Question → Evidence → Draft → Verify → Cite lifecycle end-to-end, and halt at the first gate that fails — never draft past an unresolved citation, an unsupported claim, or a failed compile. This skill orchestrates the kit's existing skills and agents; it does not bypass any of their rules. A clean cycle means: every \cite resolves, every claim is sourced and calibrated, the log compiles, and a simulated reviewer would sign off.

When to Use

Invoke with /manuscript-cycle [section] when:

• Taking a section from outline to review-ready in one pass
• You want the full discipline loop run for you, with the gates enforced
• Running headless (/manuscript-cycle mode:headless) over a spec for an unattended draft pass

Scope it: /manuscript-cycle introduction works one section; /manuscript-cycle reads the next not-started section from MANUSCRIPT_MAP.md → Structure.

Process

Phase 0 — Load & scope

1. Read MANUSCRIPT_MAP.md (thesis, contribution, venue, the Structure table) and CLAUDE.project.md / STYLE.md if present.
2. Pick the target section (argument) and restate it as a claim a reader could dispute (the section's Question).
3. Confirm the scope with the author unless mode:headless (then proceed and report).

Phase 1 — Outline (argument architecture)

4. If the section's claim/evidence plan is missing from the map, run /outline for it (or dispatch the outline-planner agent). Each section states the one claim it establishes, the evidence it needs, and a word budget.
5. GATE — evidence availability: if the outline flags evidence not in the library (references.bib / sources/ / vault), surface it. Run /lit-briefing for gaps and propose search directions. Do not draft around a citation you intend to "find later." Halt for the author if a load-bearing source is missing (headless: mark the gap and skip that claim).

Phase 2 — Ground

6. Pull the supporting evidence for each claim from the vault (/literature-review for related work; read vault/summaries/ for specifics). Confirm each intended \cite key exists in references.bib.

Phase 3 — Draft

7. Write the smallest passage that makes each point, matching the manuscript's voice (STYLE.md). Every non-trivial claim carries a real \cite; unknowns get [CITE] / [VALUE — verify] — never a fabrication.

Phase 4 — Verify (the hard gate)

8. The hooks run on each edit. Before proceeding, confirm:
   • citation-gate passed (no dangling \cite/\ref) — .hook-state/last_quality_gate.json.
   • compile-gate clean if a .log exists.
   • Run /claim-check on the draft: every claim cited / author's-own / common-knowledge; verbs calibrated to the evidence.
9. GATE: if citation-gate, compile-gate, or /claim-check reports a failure, stop and fix before any review. Do not advance with [CITE] placeholders silently embedded — report (sourced / placeholder / unverified).

Phase 5 — Review

10. Run /peer-review (dispatches peer-reviewer + integrity-reviewer). For numeric/empirical sections also run /stats-check; for methods, /methods-review.
11. Triage findings: address every Major issue now (re-entering Phase 3–4 as needed); list Minor issues for the author.

Phase 6 — Revise / respond

12. Apply the fixes. If this cycle is answering real reviewers, run /response-to-reviewers (quote → change → location; never claim an unmade change). Log any recurring critique to tasks/reviews/.

Phase 7 — Report

13. Produce the cycle report (below). In mode:headless, write it to tasks/ and stop at the first hard gate rather than asking.

Output Format

# Manuscript Cycle — <section> (<date>)
Thesis: <one line>     Stage: <from MANUSCRIPT_MAP>

Phase results
- Outline ......... <ok | evidence gaps: N>
- Ground .......... <sources used: keys>
- Draft ........... <words / budget>
- Verify .......... citation-gate <pass/FAIL> · compile-gate <pass/skip/FAIL> · claim-check (sourced/placeholder/unverified)
- Review .......... Major: N · Minor: N  (recommendation)
- Revise .......... <fixes applied / response letter>

HALTED AT: <phase + reason>          # if any gate failed
Open for author: <minor issues, evidence gaps, decisions>

Pairs With

/outline · /literature-review · /lit-briefing · /claim-check · /stats-check · /methods-review · /peer-review · /response-to-reviewers; gated by citation-gate.sh / compile-gate.sh / stop-gate.sh. It is the research analogue of the code kit's /feature-cycle.

Common Rationalizations (rejected)

• "Draft now, find the citation later." → Phase 1 gate forbids it. Surface the gap.
• "Skip review, it's a small section." → Major issues hide in small sections; Phase 5 runs.
• "The placeholder is fine for now." → Only if reported in the tally; never silently shipped past Phase 4.

Notes

• Headless (mode:headless): no interactive confirmations — proceed with stated assumptions, halt at the first hard gate, and write the report to tasks/. Use for an unattended first-draft pass; a human still reviews before submission.
• This skill never relaxes a gate. If a gate is wrong (broken infra), the author sets SKIP_QUALITY_GATE=1 deliberately and records why — the cycle does not bypass it on its own.
• Reasoner-tier for outline/review phases, Drafter-tier for the draft phase (CLAUDE.md → Model Selection).