Now liveThe Skillselion MCP - thousands of ranked skills, loaded into your agent mid-task. No install.Get it →
beita6969 avatar

Scientific Writing

  • 20 installs
  • 869 repo stars
  • Updated June 8, 2026
  • beita6969/scienceclaw

scientific-writing is a Claude skill that assists with academic paper composition, LaTeX formatting, abstract drafting, reviewer responses, and grant proposals.

About

This skill assists with academic paper composition, LaTeX formatting, and scholarly communication. A researcher uses it to draft abstracts and paper sections, format in LaTeX, respond to reviewer comments, or write grant proposals. It supplies paper-structure templates, LaTeX and BibTeX snippets, a reviewer-response template, citation-style guidance, and a writing-quality checklist.

  • Templates for IMRaD papers, review/survey papers, and NSF/NIH grant proposals
  • LaTeX support with article templates, package list, and BibTeX entry formats
  • Reviewer-response template plus a clarity, precision, and flow writing checklist

Scientific Writing by the numbers

  • 20 all-time installs (skills.sh)
  • Ranked #999 of 1,879 Documentation skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
  • Data as of Aug 2, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
At a glance

scientific-writing capabilities & compatibility

Capabilities
documentation · copywriting
Use cases
documentation · copywriting
From the docs

What scientific-writing says it does

Academic paper composition, LaTeX formatting, and scholarly communication.
SKILL.md
Assist with scientific paper writing, LaTeX formatting, abstract drafting, review responses, grant proposals, and academic communication.
SKILL.md
Quantify claims ("increased by 15%" not "significantly increased")
SKILL.md
npx skills add https://github.com/beita6969/scienceclaw --skill scientific-writing

Add your badge

Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.

Listed on Skillselion
Installs20
repo stars869
Last updatedJune 8, 2026
Repositorybeita6969/scienceclaw

What it does

Draft or edit a scientific paper section, abstract, LaTeX document, reviewer response, or grant proposal.

Who is it for?

Drafting and editing paper sections, abstracts, LaTeX documents, reviewer responses, and grant proposals.

Skip if: Non-academic or marketing copywriting.

When should I use this skill?

You need to write or edit a scientific paper, abstract, LaTeX document, reviewer response, or grant proposal.

What you get

Well-structured paper sections, correct LaTeX and BibTeX, and effective reviewer responses following academic conventions.

  • abstract
  • paper section draft
  • LaTeX document

By the numbers

  • 7-section IMRaD structure
  • 5 citation styles (APA, IEEE, Vancouver, Chicago, Nature)
  • Abstract length 150-300 words

Files

SKILL.mdMarkdownGitHub ↗

Scientific Writing

Academic paper composition, LaTeX formatting, and scholarly communication.

Paper Structure Templates

IMRaD (standard empirical paper)

1. Title: Concise, informative, includes key variables 2. Abstract: Background (1-2 sentences) → Objective → Methods → Results → Conclusion (150-300 words) 3. Introduction: Broad context → Narrow focus → Gap → Research question/hypothesis 4. Methods: Reproducible detail; subsections by procedure 5. Results: Findings without interpretation; tables/figures referenced 6. Discussion: Summary → Interpretation → Comparison with literature → Limitations → Implications → Future work 7. References: Consistent citation style

Review / Survey Paper

1. Introduction with scope and search methodology 2. Taxonomy / organizational framework 3. Systematic coverage of subtopics 4. Synthesis and comparison 5. Open problems and future directions

Grant Proposal (NSF/NIH style)

1. Specific Aims (1 page) 2. Significance 3. Innovation 4. Approach (preliminary data, research plan, timeline) 5. Budget justification

LaTeX Support

Common Templates

Article:

\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,amsthm}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}
\usepackage{natbib}

\title{Your Title}
\author{Author Name \\ Institution \\ \texttt{email@example.com}}
\date{\today}

\begin{document}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
Your abstract here.
\end{abstract}

\section{Introduction}
\section{Methods}
\section{Results}
\section{Discussion}

\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
\bibliography{references}
\end{document}

Useful LaTeX Packages

  • booktabs — professional tables
  • siunitx — SI units and number formatting
  • algorithm2e — pseudocode
  • tikz/pgfplots — figures and plots
  • cleveref — smart cross-references
  • subcaption — subfigures
  • listings/minted — code listings

BibTeX Entry Formats

@article{key,
  author  = {Last, First and Last2, First2},
  title   = {Paper Title},
  journal = {Journal Name},
  year    = {2024},
  volume  = {1},
  pages   = {1--10},
  doi     = {10.xxxx/xxxxx}
}

Reviewer Response Template

We thank the reviewer for their constructive feedback. Below we address each comment point by point.

---

**Reviewer Comment 1:** [Quote the comment]

**Response:** [Your response]

**Changes made:** [Describe specific changes with page/line numbers]

---

Guidelines for reviewer responses:

  • Be respectful and grateful, even for harsh reviews
  • Address every point, even minor ones
  • Clearly distinguish between changes made and rebuttals
  • Provide evidence (new analyses, references) for disagreements
  • Reference specific manuscript locations for changes

Writing Quality Checklist

Clarity

  • One idea per paragraph
  • Topic sentence first
  • Active voice preferred (but passive OK for methods)
  • Avoid jargon without definition
  • Short sentences for complex ideas

Precision

  • Quantify claims ("increased by 15%" not "significantly increased")
  • Distinguish correlation from causation
  • Use hedging appropriately ("suggests" vs "proves")
  • Report effect sizes, not just p-values

Flow

  • Logical paragraph transitions
  • Consistent terminology throughout
  • Forward references for later sections
  • Signposting ("First... Second... Finally...")

Common Issues to Fix

  • Dangling modifiers
  • Pronoun ambiguity ("this" without referent)
  • Nominalization overuse (use verbs, not noun forms)
  • Redundancy ("past history", "future plans")
  • Weak openings ("It is well known that...")

Citation Styles

  • APA 7th: (Author, Year) — social sciences
  • IEEE: [1] numbered — engineering/CS
  • Vancouver: (1) numbered — biomedical
  • Chicago: footnotes — humanities
  • Nature: superscript numbered — natural sciences

When unsure, ask the user for their target journal/conference and adapt accordingly.

Related skills

FAQ

What paper structures does it cover?

IMRaD empirical papers, review/survey papers, and NSF/NIH-style grant proposals.

Does it help with reviewer responses?

Yes, it provides a point-by-point reviewer-response template and guidelines for addressing comments.

This week in AI coding

Five minutes, every Monday - the tools, releases and tactics for developers.

unsubscribe anytime.