27 added, 7 removed. Audit A to A.
---
name: logic-review
- description: Review chapter drafts for paragraph-level flow, transitions, and argument continuity before editing.
+ description: Review stable chapter or manuscript drafts for paragraph flow, transitions, argument continuity, and repeated rhetorical functions before editing. Use after the author-approved spine is stable; route structural drift back to thesis-control.
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Bash, Edit
---
# /logic-review — Paragraph Logic Review
## Purpose
- Find paragraphs that may need a topic sentence, a clearer transition, merging, or re-ordering. The deterministic script flags candidates; the agent explains and proposes edits.
+ Find paragraphs that may need a topic sentence, a clearer transition, merging,
+ re-ordering, or removal of duplicated argumentative work. The deterministic
+ script flags mechanical candidates; the agent separately reviews rhetorical
+ functions without redefining the manuscript spine.
## Trigger Words
This skill activates on: `logic review`, `flow check`, `paragraph logic`, `/logic-review`.
## Workflow
1. Run:
`python3 scripts/audit-logic.py --base-dir . --json`
- 2. Read the flagged paragraphs and nearby context.
- 3. Present a numbered review table with location, issue type, why it matters, and a proposed edit.
- 4. Wait for user approval before editing chapter files.
- 5. Apply only approved edits, then re-run the audit.
+ 2. Confirm that the research object, core question, intended use, primary
+ experiment, headline claim, and evidence boundary are stable under the
+ active `/thesis-control` contract. If they are not, stop the language pass
+ and route the issue to drift control or revision escalation.
+ 3. Read the flagged paragraphs and nearby context.
+ 4. Label each relevant sentence or paragraph by its main function: `problem`,
+ `gap`, `method`, `evidence`, `interpretation`, `boundary`, or `transition`.
+ 5. Flag duplicated functions and monotonous sequences, especially repeated
+ `evidence -> disclaimer` endings. Prefer deleting or consolidating repeated
+ argumentative work over generating synonymous wording.
+ 6. Check boundary placement. Scope must remain aligned across the paper, but
+ full limitation prose need not be repeated after every result. Preserve
+ essential local qualifiers and concentrate fuller study-boundary language
+ in the abstract ending, Methods boundary, Discussion/Limitations, and
+ conclusion when appropriate.
+ 7. Present a numbered review table with location, function, issue type, why it
+ matters, and a proposed edit.
+ 8. Wait for user approval before editing chapter files.
+ 9. Apply only approved edits, then re-run the audit.
## Constraints
1. Never auto-fix chapter logic without user approval.
2. Preserve the author's argument and section structure.
3. Keep edits local to the flagged paragraph unless the user approves a broader rewrite.
- 4. No emoji.
+ 4. Do not use a logic or style pass to repair an unstable research question,
+ evidence chain, application purpose, or contribution order.
+ 5. No emoji.