prl-workflow
GitHubPRL论文工作流路由器，根据当前阶段指导选择专用技能。涵盖从范围评估、结果阐述、方法精简、图表设计到投稿和回复审稿意见的全流程，确保稿件符合PRL的高影响力和严格篇幅要求。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill prl-workflow -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "prl-workflow",
"description": "Use when deciding which prl-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from scope-fit through revision for a Physical Review Letters (PRL) manuscript. Routes — does not replace — the specialized skills."
}
Physical Review Letters Workflow (prl-workflow)
Overview
This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill; it tells you which prl- skill to use at your current stage*.
Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, the target is Physical Review Letters (PRL) — a short, high-impact Letter that must clear the importance + broad interest gate and fit the strict deductible length limit, with detail pushed to Supplemental Material. If the work is a solid but incremental or specialist advance, the right home is Physical Review A–E or Physical Review Research, and prl-scope-fit will say so.
When to trigger
- User asks "what should I do next?" on a physics Letter
- User drops a draft and needs the current bottleneck diagnosed
- User is unsure whether the result is "PRL-worthy" or belongs in a specialized PR journal
- The Letter is over the length limit and detail must be re-partitioned
- User received an APS referee report and needs to switch into response mode
Routing table
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Unsure if the result is important / broad enough for PRL | prl-scope-fit |
| Result is real but the "why it matters to all physicists" is unclear | prl-results-framing |
| Methods sprawl into the Letter; can't tell what to keep vs. move | prl-methods |
| Figures too dense / lead figure doesn't show the central result | prl-figures |
| Letter doesn't stand alone; reader needs the SM to follow it | prl-supplementary |
| Prose is wordy, hedged, jargon-heavy, or not APS house style | prl-writing-style |
| Over the length / figure / equation / reference limit | prl-length-management |
| Need a cover letter that justifies importance + broad interest | prl-cover-letter |
| Ready to submit; need format / file / metadata preflight | prl-submission |
| Choosing suggested/opposed referees; anticipating objections | prl-referee-strategy |
| Received a referee report or editor decision; need to respond | prl-revision |
Default order
prl-scope-fit— settle the importance + broad-interest gate first; redirect to PR A–E / PR Research if it failsprl-results-framing— lock the single central claim and its broad significanceprl-methods— keep only what a physicist needs to trust the result; the rest goes to SMprl-figures— design the lead figure to convey the central result at a glanceprl-supplementary— partition derivations / extended data into SM; the Letter must stand aloneprl-writing-style— APS house style, concision, defined notationprl-length-management— fit the deductible limit; trim ruthlessly (do this AFTER content is stable)prl-cover-letter— argue the importance + broad-interest case to the editorsprl-submission— final preflight (format, files, classification, metadata)prl-referee-strategy— suggested / opposed referees; pre-empt likely objectionsprl-revision— after the referee reports arrive
prl-writing-styleandprl-length-managementare late polish stages. Do not trim to the limit before the central claim and figures are stable, or you will cut the wrong material.
Decision heuristics
- "Reviewer 2 will say 'why not Phys. Rev. B?'" →
prl-scope-fit - "I can state the result but not why anyone outside my subfield cares" →
prl-results-framing - "My Methods section is three paragraphs of apparatus detail" →
prl-methods - "My lead figure has six panels and a 9-line caption" →
prl-figures - "You can't understand Fig. 2 without reading the SM" →
prl-supplementary - "I'm 600 words over and figures count against me" →
prl-length-management - "The editor needs to be told why this is broad-interest" →
prl-cover-letter - "Submitting tonight" →
prl-submission - "Who should I suggest as a referee?" →
prl-referee-strategy - "Three referee reports just landed" →
prl-revision
Letter status board
A Letter's readiness is a two-column question: is the content settled, and does it fit the container? Fill this board before invoking prl-submission; any cell still marked OPEN routes you back to the named skill.
PRL STATUS BOARD verdict owner skill
======================================== ======== =====================
GATE importance + broad interest OPEN prl-scope-fit
(fails → retarget PR A–E / PRR)
CLAIM one central result, stated for OPEN prl-results-framing
physicists outside the subfield
BODY methods trimmed to what earns OPEN prl-methods
trust; remainder moved to SM
FIG lead figure = central result OPEN prl-figures
at a glance
SM Letter stands alone; SM holds OPEN prl-supplementary
derivations / extended data only
STYLE APS house style, notation defined OPEN prl-writing-style
FIT inside the deductible length OPEN prl-length-management
limit (figures/equations count)
CASE cover letter argues importance OPEN prl-cover-letter
REFS suggested / opposed referees named OPEN prl-referee-strategy
---------------------------------------- -------- ---------------------
all rows CLOSED → prl-submission preflight → submit
referee report arrives → prl-revision
Differences vs. specialized Physical Review journals
PRL and Phys. Rev. A–E / PR Research share APS production and rigor standards but differ on the gate:
- PRL: importance + broad interest, communicated concisely. A correct-but-incremental result is rejected on breadth grounds even if flawless.
- PR A–E / PR Research: thorough, archival, specialist-appropriate; length is generous and full methods belong in the body.
If prl-scope-fit returns a "specialist" verdict, retarget to the appropriate PR journal rather than fighting the breadth gate.
Anti-patterns
- Do not skip
prl-scope-fit— editors triage on importance/breadth first; a wrong-venue Letter wastes a submission cycle - Do not run
prl-length-managementbefore content is stable — you will cut load-bearing material - Do not let
prl-supplementarybecome a dumping ground that the Letter silently depends on - Do not draft
prl-revisionresponses before you have actually changed the manuscript
Durable norms only. Verify current word/figure/reference limits, formats, and policies on the official APS / PRL author page.
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 14:12
