# Manuscript Package Checklist

Use this before calling a topic package complete.

## Required files

- `01_topic_brief.md`
- `02_evidence_map.md`
- `03_outline.md`
- `04_manuscript_draft.md`
- `05_revision_notes.md`
- `references.bib`

## Topic brief checks

- question is specific, not just a field description
- study design matches the claim strength
- optional analyses are separated from core analyses
- manuscript type is explicit (`full original article`, `extended draft`, or justified short form)

## Evidence map checks

- at least 3-5 directly relevant papers are captured
- one or more contradictory or limiting sources are included
- the stated gap is narrower than “few studies have explored..."
- the key studies named here can all be traced into `references.bib`

## Outline checks

- title matches actual design and population
- figure/table plan exists before drafting results prose
- manuscript story can be explained in 3-5 sentences
- section-level word targets are written down before drafting

## Draft checks

- prose is paragraph-based, not bullet-based
- methods and results stay aligned
- limitations are real and not buried
- no fake certainty when the study is observational or exploratory
- unless user-specified otherwise, the draft is long enough to resemble a real paper rather than a memo (default expectation: roughly 3500-6000 words for a full original article)
- literature-backed paragraphs use inline citations tied to `references.bib`
- naked author-year citations without BibTeX keys are removed or converted
- the abstract does not consume a disproportionate share of the total word count

## Reference checks

- every cited key in `04_manuscript_draft.md` exists in `references.bib`
- every entry kept in `references.bib` is either cited in the draft or intentionally retained for near-term revision work
- citation style inside markdown is internally consistent (prefer `[@Key]` / `[@Key1; @Key2]` while drafting)

## Revision note checks

- every unresolved issue is explicit
- risks are framed for the next human decision-maker
- future work is separated from claims already supported
- missing citations or underdeveloped sections are listed explicitly

## Local quick checks

Run these before handoff:

```bash
wc -w 04_manuscript_draft.md
rg -n '\[@' 04_manuscript_draft.md
rg -n '\([A-Z][A-Za-z-]+ et al\.,? 20[0-9]{2}\)' 04_manuscript_draft.md
```

Interpretation:
- `wc -w`: if the draft is far below the expected range, it is probably still a memo.
- `rg '\[@'`: confirms inline citation markers exist.
- `rg` for naked author-year patterns: flags places where prose may mention literature without a traceable BibTeX key.
