results-section-revision
Results Section Revision
Overview
Use this skill for late-stage Results revision when the science is mostly stable but the writing architecture is not. It is narrower than scientific-writing and manuscript-optimizer: the job here is to repair subsection titles, bridge paragraphs, paragraph openings, and local argumentative flow.
Use scientific-writing for general prose drafting or rewriting. Use manuscript-optimizer when the claim hierarchy, evidence chain, or figure logic is still unstable. Use this skill when the section is largely right but still reads like stitched figure captions rather than a controlled argument.
Quick Checks
Before revising any Results subsection, check:
- Is the title selling the conclusion rather than the method?
- Does the first sentence of each paragraph state that paragraph's point?
- Are openings like
we asked,we examined, orto test thisoverused? - Are abstract words masking a more specific noun?
- Is the relationship to the previous paragraph explicit?
- Is the paragraph only reporting a result, or advancing the argument?
- Does the paragraph close by stating what changes in interpretation?
More from boom5426/nature-paper-skills
academic-presentations
>-
15submission-audit
Use when a manuscript is close to submission or resubmission and you need a preflight audit for claim support, figure-panel coverage, legend sync, methods references, terminology stability, and venue-facing risks.
14paper-workflow
Use when deciding which paper-related skill to use or how to sequence manuscript work from project setup through submission and rebuttal.
14reference-audit-guide
Use when the user asks for citation-verification principles, reference-audit best practices, or guidance on preventing fake or inaccurate citations in academic writing.
14paper-reviewer
Use when acting as a journal or grant reviewer and writing formal reviewer-side evaluations focused on methodology, statistics, reporting standards, reproducibility, and constructive feedback.
13rebuttal-response
Use when responding to journal or conference reviewer comments and you need a structured author response, aligned manuscript edits, and clear decisions about when to clarify, add evidence, concede, or respectfully disagree.
13