nature-portfolio-playbook
$
npx mdskill add Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills/nature-portfolio-playbookAlign life-science manuscripts with Nature Portfolio venues and policy.
- Decides venue fit for Nature, Nature Methods, or Nature Biotechnology.
- Frames articles, resources, analyses, or short-format methods reports.
- Checks policy-aware pre-submission requirements before heavy revision.
- Delivers clear venue routing and article-type recommendations.
SKILL.md
.github/skills/nature-portfolio-playbookView on GitHub ↗
--- name: nature-portfolio-playbook description: Use when choosing among Nature, Nature Methods, or Nature Biotechnology, or when preparing a Nature Portfolio life-science manuscript for venue fit, article-type framing, and policy-aware pre-submission checks. --- # Nature Portfolio Playbook ## Overview Use this skill when the venue decision itself is still live, or when a manuscript already targets `Nature`, `Nature Methods`, or `Nature Biotechnology` and needs venue-specific framing before a heavy revision pass. This skill is about fit and policy. It does not replace `scientific-writing`, `manuscript-optimizer`, or `submission-audit`. ## When To Use Use this skill when: - the user asks whether a story fits `Nature`, `Nature Methods`, or `Nature Biotechnology` - the paper has a `Nature`-style tone but the actual venue is undecided - the contribution could be framed as an `Article`, `Resource`, `Analysis`, or short-format methods report - a manuscript is close to submission and needs a Nature Portfolio-specific preflight Do not use this skill when: - the task is generic sentence-level editing - the venue is a conference or a non-Nature journal - the manuscript structure itself is still unstable and needs `manuscript-optimizer` first ## Venue Routing ### Flagship `Nature` Default to `Nature` only when the paper makes a broad conceptual advance that matters outside the immediate specialty and can be explained to non-specialists without heavy field-specific scaffolding. Use these framing defaults: - prioritize broad readership over specialist density - keep title and abstract low-jargon - preserve the non-specialist-friendly summary paragraph expectation - if fit is uncertain, explicitly test whether the broad-readership case is real before optimizing prose too far ### `Nature Methods` Prefer `Nature Methods` when the central contribution is a method, assay, platform, computational approach, or resource whose main claim is enabling power. Before calling a story `Nature Methods`-fit, check that the manuscript can support all of these: - a clear technical advance over available approaches - validation and benchmarking against credible baselines or alternatives - enough detail or protocol access for reproducibility - demonstrated general utility, not just one narrow showcase - a compelling biological or biomedical application that shows why the method matters ### `Nature Biotechnology` Prefer `Nature Biotechnology` when the paper's value is not just technical novelty but biotechnology significance: enabling capability, translational relevance, engineering depth, platform utility, or community-scale resource value. Before calling a story `Nature Biotechnology`-fit, check that the manuscript can make legible: - why the advance matters for biotechnology or medicine, not just for one specialist benchmark - why the story is substantial enough for a full article rather than a narrower methods report - whether the paper is truly an `Article` or would be better framed as a `Resource` ## Article-Type Check Do this early. Do not treat article type as formatting cleanup. - `Article`: full research story with multiple linked claims and a substantial evidence chain - `Resource`: community-useful dataset, platform, atlas, database, or screening asset whose lasting value is broad reuse - `Analysis`: integrative or comparative analytical study when the core contribution is the analytical insight rather than a new experimental method - short-format method/report categories: use only when the story is tighter, more self-contained, and the journal explicitly supports that format If the manuscript keeps oscillating between `method paper` and `resource paper`, resolve that before rewriting the abstract or Results. ## Nature Portfolio Preflight Run this before calling a draft submission-ready: 1. Reporting standards - confirm whether a reporting summary will be required - make sure the manuscript and supplement already contain the information that summary will demand 2. Data and code availability - check that repository names, accession IDs, download links, and access restrictions are ready to disclose - do not wait until after acceptance to figure out the data/code statement 3. Protocol and reproducibility readiness - for methods papers, ensure the usable protocol path is clear: supplement, protocol repository, or public method record 4. Image integrity and raw data - ensure unprocessed source images and raw blot/gel material can be produced if requested - remove any figure-preparation habit that could look like selective enhancement 5. AI and attribution - disclose qualifying use of generative AI tools where the journal requires it - do not treat AI-made images or undisclosed AI-written content as safe by default 6. Related-manuscript and preprint disclosures - disclose preprints, overlapping submissions, related manuscripts, and conference-proceedings history when relevant ## Working Rule Use this decision order: 1. choose audience and venue family 2. choose article type 3. check whether the evidence package matches the venue promise 4. only then optimize framing and prose ## Official Source Pointers Keep these Nature Portfolio pages as the primary references: - `Nature` formatting guide - `Nature` editorial criteria and processes - `Nature Methods` aims, content, and editorial-policies pages - `Nature Biotechnology` aims, content, and editorial-policies pages - Nature Portfolio policies on reporting standards, image integrity, AI, and preprints/conference proceedings
More from Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills
- academic-presentations>-
- academic-researcherUse when conducting literature reviews, summarizing papers, comparing methodologies, identifying research gaps, or supporting scholarly writing across disciplines.
- citation-verifierUse when checking manuscript citations, bibliography hygiene, DOI or PMID completeness, placeholder references, or BibTeX consistency before submission or revision.
- conference-paper-writingUse when writing or revising ML or AI conference papers for venues such as NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, ACL, AAAI, or COLM, especially when the workflow is conference-first rather than Nature-style journal-first.
- data-availabilityUse when drafting, auditing, or revising Data Availability statements, repository plans, accession-number placement, source-data coverage, or restricted-data wording for journal submission or resubmission.
- figure-plannerUse when designing, restructuring, or auditing manuscript figures and you need to define one main claim per figure, assign panel roles, align legends with the text, or decide what belongs in main figures versus supplement.
- manuscript-optimizerUse when reviewing or revising an academic manuscript whose central claim, evidence chain, figures, terminology, and prose may have drifted out of sync before submission or resubmission.
- paper-analyzerUse when deeply analyzing a single paper and producing structured notes on claims, methods, figures, evaluation, strengths, limitations, and related work.
- paper-bootstrapUse when starting a new manuscript project or cleaning up an existing paper directory and you need a standard structure, active source files, project memory, and venue defaults before deeper writing begins.
- paper-reviewerUse when acting as a journal or grant reviewer and writing formal reviewer-side evaluations focused on methodology, statistics, reporting standards, reproducibility, and constructive feedback.