Referee Review (generic, offline)

This skill defines a generic (non-venue-specific) peer-review output contract that is designed to be ingested by an orchestrator as artifacts.

Output contract (must)

• review.md: first line must be exactly VERDICT: READY|NOT_READY
• review.json: must validate against schemas/review.schema.json (fail-fast)

Author pre-flight (run before submitting a packet here)

The author agent should walk the M1-M7 pre-approval ritual from skills/research-integrity/ before posting a draft to this reviewer. Findings the author could have caught (hallucinated citation, hallucinated measurement, methodology-not-in-artifacts, frame-lock, etc.) should not be the reviewer's BLOCKING items; this reviewer is for adjudication against the packet, not for catching omissions the author skipped.

Recording the pre-flight. The M1-M7 walk is always required before posting a draft to this reviewer. How the walk is recorded depends on whether an approval gate is open:

• A1-A5 gate open. Run nullius integrity-record --approval-id <id> --modes <Mx,...> --notes "..." against that gate's approval_id. The receipt is the canonical machine record of the pre-flight and is fail-closed-enforced by nullius approve (missing receipt → INTEGRITY_RECEIPT_REQUIRED, see packages/shared/src/integrity-receipt.ts). This matches the gate-coupled "machine record" path documented in skills/research-integrity/SKILL.md §"Recording the check".
• No gate open (ad-hoc draft submission). Record the M1-M7 modes you walked inline in your response or in the notebook entry that accompanies the draft — the narrative record from skills/research-integrity/ §"Recording the check" is the audit trail here. Do not invent a synthetic approval_id to feed the CLI: nullius integrity-record is parameterized on approval_id precisely because the receipt is the gate-coupling key, and a junk identifier pollutes .nullius/integrity_log.jsonl without producing any enforcement (this reviewer's pipeline does not consume the log — scripts/run_referee_review.py does not read it).

This reviewer remains generic and non-venue-specific; the pre-flight is the author-side discipline, not a venue requirement.

No-network / role separation

• Reviewer must not fetch new evidence (no INSPIRE/arXiv/DOI/GitHub/web).
• If additional evidence is needed, populate evidence_requests with structured queries (to be executed by an external stage), and keep verdict=NOT_READY when blocking.

CLI (deterministic, offline)

python3 scripts/run_referee_review.py --profile generic --packet fixtures/packet.md --out-dir /tmp/review_out

This writes:

• /tmp/review_out/review.md
• /tmp/review_out/review.json

Packet format (minimal)

The packet is a Markdown file. Recommended sections:

• ## Paper diff
• ## References (short bibliography or notes)
• ## Artifact pointers (one per line, e.g. - /absolute/path/to/artifact or - file:///absolute/path/to/artifact)