preflight-check
Skill59 starsChanged 5 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Deterministic desk-reject preflight linter for LaTeX paper submissions. Use it when a researcher asks "is my paper ready to submit", or mentions preflight, desk reject, submission check, page limit, anonymization, double-blind, missing checklist, or format/template compliance for a conference (NeurIPS, ICML, CHI, SIGSPATIAL, SIGMOD, ICDE, CVPR, LNCS...). Lints the .tex source against a machine-readable venue profile for documentclass and style-file options, margin/template tampering (geometry, savetrees, spacing hacks), anonymization leaks (author block, acknowledgments, repo links, first-person self-citations, \thanks, pdfauthor), required sections (NeurIPS checklist, ICML impact statement, AI-use acknowledgement, COI, CCS concepts/keywords), abstract length, keywords format, and page-limit risk. Every finding is reported with file:line. Runs bundled stdlib-only Python scripts; advisory only, never submits anything.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Data-Wise/crafttheir own version, first seen Oct 31, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- Data-Wise/craft★ 4same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository43 other files it gives its agents.
- docs/llms-full.txtllms.txt
- docs/llms.txtllms.txt
- add-venue-profileSkill
- anonymize-paperSkill
- assess-paperSkill
- benchmark-paperSkill
- check-originalitySkill
- draft-related-workSkill
- draft-surveySkill
- fetch-paperSkill
- find-papersSkill
- fit-page-limitSkill
- literature-reviewSkill
- make-posterSkill
- make-slidesSkill
- match-styleSkill
- orchestrate-paperSkill
- paper-profileSkill
- parse-cfpSkill
- plan-submissionSkill
- polish-proseSkill
- polish-tables-figuresSkill
- prepare-artifactsSkill
- prepare-camera-readySkill
- refactor-research-codeSkill
- refactor-structureSkill
- reflect-and-improveSkill
- reflect-paperSkill
- rehearse-qaSkill
- render-workspace-htmlSkill
- select-venueSkill
- simulate-reviewersSkill
- study-exemplarsSkill
- tailor-to-venueSkill
- test-research-codeSkill
- triage-reviewsSkill
- verify-citationsSkill
- verify-claimsSkill
- verify-resultsSkill
- work-with-overleafSkill
- write-abstractSkill
- write-rebuttalSkill
- write-talk-scriptSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 8
Run a deterministic desk-reject lint over a LaTeX submission before the authors hit "submit".
- Distinctive: line 36
Ask the user which track they are submitting to — page limits differ per track (e.g.
- Very specific: line 152
Always re-verify page limits/deadlines/policies against the live cfp_url before the user relies on them (step 2 is not optional).
- Distinctive: line 154
Never submit to any system on the user's behalf.
- Distinctive: line 155
Never paste large portions of the user's paper into the report — quote at most the flagged line.
- Very specific: line 165
At start: read .paper-memory/lessons.md (and profile.yml for venue tier / constraints).
- Very specific: line 174
Create .paper-memory/ on demand if absent and offer to add it to the project .gitignore.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Preflight Check
Run a deterministic desk-reject lint over a LaTeX submission before the authors hit "submit". Venues explicitly desk-reject — without review — for page-limit violations, template tampering, anonymization leaks, and missing mandatory sections. Every one of those is machine-checkable from the source. This skill catches them while there is still time to fix them.
When to use
- "Is my paper ready to submit to NeurIPS / SIGSPATIAL / CHI / ...?"
- "Check my paper for desk-reject risks" / "run a preflight"
- "Did I anonymize this properly?" / "double-blind check"
- "Am I over the page limit?" / "is my template compliant?"
- Right after
tailor-to-venue, and always before any actual submission.
Inputs
- The main
.texfile of the submission (the one with\documentclass).\input/\includefiles are followed automatically. - A venue profile:
venues/conferences/<venue>-<year>.yml(schema invenues/schema.yml). If the venue has no profile yet, create one first withparse-cfp(or copy the nearest family file and fill it in). - Optional but strongly recommended: a compiled
.logor.pdfnext to the.tex(same basename) so the page-count risk check can run.
Process
- Resolve the venue profile. Find the matching file under
venues/conferences/. Confirm the year matches the target deadline cycle. Ask the user which track they are submitting to — page limits differ per track (e.g. SIGSPATIAL Research = 10 pages excl. references, Demo = 4 incl.). Sanity-check the merged profile with:python3 scripts/venue_profile.py venues/conferences/<venue>.yml --track <name> - Re-verify critical facts against the live CFP — mandatory. Profiles
are a starting point, never ground truth; a stale page limit causes the
exact desk reject this skill exists to prevent. Fetch the profile's
cfp_urland confirm: page limit + what it excludes, blind level, template invocation, required sections, and the deadline. If anything differs, update the profile YAML first and say so in the report. Run the full preflight:
python3 scripts/run_preflight.py paper.tex \ --venue venues/conferences/<venue>-<year>.yml --track "<track>"Or run checkers individually when the user asks about one dimension:
Script Checks Run scripts/check_template.pydocumentclass + options vs profile, year-versioned .sty (NeurIPS/ICML/ICLR), geometry/savetrees/fullpage, \setlengthon layout dims,\linespread<1, negative\vspacepatterns, column count, page-limit risk from.log/.pdfpython3 scripts/check_template.py paper.tex --venue <yml> --track <t>scripts/check_anonymization.py\author/\affiliation/\email/\orcid/\thankscontent, acknowledgments sections, funding/grant lines, identifying links (GitHub, personal pages) vs anonymized mirrors, first-person self-citations, hyperrefpdfauthorpython3 scripts/check_anonymization.py paper.tex --venue <yml>scripts/check_sections.pyevery format.required_sectionstoken: NeurIPS checklist, ICML impact statement, AI-use acknowledgement (ICDE), COI declaration, CCS concepts +\keywords, plus title/abstract/bibliography presencepython3 scripts/check_sections.py paper.tex --venue <yml>scripts/check_abstract.pyabstract word count vs venue bounds (or the 150–250 norm), single-paragraph rule, citations/URLs in abstract, keywords format (ACM/IEEE Index Terms/LNCS 3–6) python3 scripts/check_abstract.py paper.tex --venue <yml>Useful flags on every script:
--json(machine-readable),--strict(warnings also fail),--track <substring>,--venues-dir <dir>(when the profile lives outside this repo),--no-inputs. Anonymization adds--forceto scan even at single-blind venues.- Interpret severities for the user.
ERROR— documented desk-reject grounds at this venue. Must fix.WARN— judgment call (e.g. one negative\vspaceis normal; eight is space compression). Walk through each with the user.INFO— confirmations and pointers to manual checks. Do not pad the report with these; summarize. Exit codes: 0 = no errors, 1 = errors found (or warnings with--strict), 2 = bad arguments/missing files.
- Do the manual checks the linter cannot do. Source-level linting cannot see compiled-PDF metadata, where the references actually start, supplementary files, or submission-form fields (COI declarations at ICDE live in CMT, not the PDF). Work through references/manual-checks.md with the user.
- Fix and re-run until clean. Quote each finding's
file:line, propose the minimal edit, apply it if asked, and re-run the affected checker. For the reasoning behind each check (which venue desk-rejects for what, with sources), see references/desk-reject-triggers.md.
Output
A findings report (text or --json) per checker or combined via
run_preflight.py: severity, check id, file:line, message, summary counts,
and a verdict (FAIL if any ERROR, PASS with warnings if only WARNs, else
PASS). Present it to the user as a fix-list ordered by severity, then offer
to apply fixes one at a time.
Worked example
A NeurIPS submission that still carries author identity and last year's style file. Running the combined checker:
python3 scripts/run_preflight.py paper.tex \
--venue venues/conferences/neurips-2026.yml=============================================================================
PREFLIGHT REPORT paper.tex
venue: neurips-2026 track: main
=============================================================================
-- template --------------------------------------------------------------
[ERROR] template/style-file-year paper.tex:1 — uses neurips_2025.sty; NeurIPS 2026 requires neurips_2026.sty
[WARN ] template/negative-vspace paper.tex:312 — negative \vspace before figure; isolated, likely fine
-- anonymization ---------------------------------------------------------
[ERROR] anonymization/pdf-metadata paper.tex:14 — \hypersetup{pdfauthor=...} leaks the author into PDF metadata
[WARN ] anonymization/author-block paper.tex:22 — \author populated; the .sty hides it at submission, but scrub the source
[WARN ] anonymization/self-citation paper.tex:88 — "our previous work [12]" — rewrite in third person
-- sections --------------------------------------------------------------
[ERROR] sections/missing:neurips-checklist paper.tex — no NeurIPS checklist found; a missing checklist is a desk reject
-- abstract --------------------------------------------------------------
clean.
=============================================================================
VERDICT: FAIL — fix ERRORs before submitting (3 error(s), 3 warning(s), 0 info)
Profiles can go stale: re-verify limits/policies at https://neurips.cc/Conferences/2026/CallForPapers
=============================================================================How to present this: lead with the three ERRORs as a numbered fix-list
(neurips_2026.sty, drop the pdfauthor leak, add the checklist), each with
its file:line and the one-line edit; then walk the WARNs as judgment calls.
Re-verify the page limit and checklist requirement at the cfp_url before the
user relies on the verdict, then re-run the affected checker after each fix.
Adapt to your discipline
Profiles can represent conferences, journals, and workshops in any field. Add venue YAMLs with your community's rules — the checkers only read the profile, so new disciplines need data, not code.
Guardrails
- A clean preflight is necessary, not sufficient — never tell the user the paper "will not be desk-rejected"; say "no machine-checkable desk-reject triggers found".
- Always re-verify page limits/deadlines/policies against the live
cfp_urlbefore the user relies on them (step 2 is not optional). - Never submit to any system on the user's behalf; stop at the report.
- Never paste large portions of the user's paper into the report — quote at most the flagged line.
- Citation problems are out of scope here: route them through
verify-citations.
Memory
This skill uses the shared .paper-memory/ convention in the user's paper
directory, following paper-memory-convention.md.
- At start: read
.paper-memory/lessons.md(andprofile.ymlfor venue tier / constraints). Skip re-flagging issues already recorded and acted on; lead with anyrecurringdesk-reject habits this author has (e.g. "you tend to compress layout near the page limit"). - At end: append each finding worth remembering as one dated entry in the
shared format
- [YYYY-MM-DD] (preflight-check | <scope>) issue -> recommendation(usereflect-and-improve'sreflect_log.py append, which dedupes and dates). Tag a repeat-across-papers habitrecurring, a one-offthis-paper. - Create
.paper-memory/on demand if absent and offer to add it to the project.gitignore. It is local-only; never upload it or copy it into this repo.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

