ngeo-workflow
GitHubNature Geoscience 投稿流程路由助手，根据稿件当前状态（如范围评估、结果框架、方法精简、图表优化、字数管理、回复审稿等）推荐并引导调用对应的 ngeo-* 子技能，确保符合期刊对广泛地球系统科学兴趣的要求。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill ngeo-workflow -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "ngeo-workflow",
"description": "Use when deciding which ngeo-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from scope-fit through revision for a Nature Geoscience (Nat. Geosci.) manuscript. Routes — does not replace — the specialized skills."
}
Nature Geoscience Workflow (ngeo-workflow)
Overview
This is the router. It does not do any one stage's work; it tells you which ngeo- skill to use at your current stage* and in what order.
Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, the target is Nature Geoscience — a Nature Portfolio flagship that publishes Earth-system advances of broad, cross-disciplinary interest across the solid Earth, atmosphere, oceans, cryosphere, climate, and planetary science. The winning manuscript is not the most thorough regional case study; it is the one whose quantitative result changes how the wider Earth-science community understands a process. If the work is a solid but locally-scoped or specialist advance, its home is a community journal (JGR, GRL, Climate of the Past, EGU/AGU titles, or Nature Communications / Communications Earth & Environment), and ngeo-scope-fit will say so.
When to trigger
- User asks "what should I do next?" on an Earth-science manuscript
- User drops a draft and needs the current bottleneck diagnosed
- User is unsure whether the result is "Nature Geoscience-worthy" or belongs in a community journal
- The Article is over the 3,000-word limit and material must be re-partitioned into Methods / Supplementary
- User received a Nature Portfolio editor or referee decision and needs to switch into response mode
Routing table
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Unsure if the result is broad / important enough for Nat. Geosci. | ngeo-scope-fit |
| Result is real but the "why the whole field cares" is unclear | ngeo-results-framing |
| Methods sprawl into the main text; unsure what goes to online Methods | ngeo-methods |
| Figures too dense / lead figure does not show the Earth-system advance | ngeo-figures |
| Main text depends on Supplementary Information to be understood | ngeo-supplementary |
| Prose is wordy, jargon-heavy, or not accessible to non-specialists | ngeo-writing-style |
| Over the 3,000-word / display-item / reference limit | ngeo-length-management |
| Need a cover letter arguing broad interest to the diverse readership | ngeo-cover-letter |
| Ready to submit; need format / files / reporting-summary preflight | ngeo-submission |
| Choosing suggested/excluded referees; anticipating objections | ngeo-referee-strategy |
| Received referee reports or an editor decision; need to respond | ngeo-revision |
Default order
ngeo-scope-fit— settle the broad-interest Earth-system gate first; redirect to a community journal if it failsngeo-results-framing— lock the single headline advance and its "Here we show" statementngeo-methods— build the online Methods section that grounds every quantitative claim in data or model diagnosticsngeo-figures— design a lead figure that carries the Earth-system result and its uncertaintyngeo-supplementary— partition extended data, model output, and derivations to SI; keep the main text self-containedngeo-writing-style— Nature house style, "accessible to non-specialists," calibrated claimsngeo-length-management— fit the 3,000-word Article budget and 4–6 display-item ceiling (do this AFTER content is stable)ngeo-cover-letter— argue broad interest to the in-house editor who triages before reviewngeo-submission— final preflight (Editorial Manager files, reporting summary, data/code availability)ngeo-referee-strategy— suggested / excluded referees; pre-empt likely objectionsngeo-revision— after the referee reports arrive
ngeo-writing-styleandngeo-length-managementare late polish stages. Do not trim to 3,000 words before the headline advance, Methods, and figures are stable, or you will cut the wrong material.
Decision heuristics
- "Reviewer 2 will say 'this is a regional study, why not JGR?'" →
ngeo-scope-fit - "I can state my measurement but not what it changes about the Earth system" →
ngeo-results-framing - "My Methods are three pages of instrument and model detail" →
ngeo-methods - "My lead figure is a six-panel map grid with a 12-line caption" →
ngeo-figures - "You can't read the main text without the Supplementary" →
ngeo-supplementary - "I'm 800 words over and have seven figures" →
ngeo-length-management - "The editor needs to see why this is cross-disciplinary" →
ngeo-cover-letter - "Submitting tonight; is the Reporting Summary done?" →
ngeo-submission - "Who should I suggest as a referee?" →
ngeo-referee-strategy - "Three referee reports just landed" →
ngeo-revision
Manuscript status board
Readiness is a two-column question: is the content settled, and does it fit the Nature Article container? Fill this board before invoking ngeo-submission; any cell still marked OPEN routes you back to the named skill.
NATURE GEOSCIENCE STATUS BOARD verdict owner skill
========================================= ======== =====================
GATE broad Earth-system interest + OPEN ngeo-scope-fit
quantitative advance (fails →
retarget community journal)
CLAIM one headline advance, framed as OPEN ngeo-results-framing
"Here we show ..." for the field
METH online Methods grounds every claim OPEN ngeo-methods
in data / model diagnostics + error
FIG lead figure = the advance + its OPEN ngeo-figures
uncertainty, map/section legible
SI main text self-contained; SI holds OPEN ngeo-supplementary
extended data / model output only
STYLE accessible to non-specialists, OPEN ngeo-writing-style
claims calibrated to evidence
FIT inside 3,000 words + 4-6 display OPEN ngeo-length-management
items + ~50 refs
CASE cover letter argues broad interest OPEN ngeo-cover-letter
DATA data + code availability + Reporting OPEN ngeo-submission
Summary complete
REFS suggested / excluded referees named OPEN ngeo-referee-strategy
----------------------------------------- -------- ---------------------
all rows CLOSED → ngeo-submission preflight → submit on Editorial Manager
referee reports arrive → ngeo-revision
Differences vs. community Earth-science journals
Nature Geoscience and community titles (JGR, GRL, Climate Dynamics, Communications Earth & Environment) share peer-review rigor but differ on the gate:
- Nature Geoscience: a broad, cross-disciplinary Earth-system advance, editor-triaged for general interest before review. A rigorous but regionally-scoped or incremental result is declined without review on interest grounds.
- Community journals: thorough, specialist-appropriate, archival; regional and incremental advances are welcome and length is generous.
If ngeo-scope-fit returns a "specialist / regional" verdict, retarget rather than fighting the broad-interest bar.
Anti-patterns
- Do not skip
ngeo-scope-fit— Nature editors desk-reject the majority of submissions before review on interest grounds; a wrong-venue manuscript wastes a cycle - Do not run
ngeo-length-managementbefore content is stable — you will cut load-bearing evidence or uncertainty - Do not let the Supplementary Information become a dump the main text silently depends on
- Do not treat data/code availability and the Reporting Summary as afterthoughts — they gate acceptance, not just submission
Durable norms only. Verify current word/display-item/reference limits, content types, formats, and policies on the official Nature Geoscience author pages (Checked: 2026-07-16).
Version History
- 9f86f09 Current 2026-07-19 17:08
