Write this file at the end of every Phase E (after documenting the round).
On completion, set "status": "completed".
Workflow
Initialization
Check REVIEW_STATE.json for recovery
Read project context and prior reviews
Initialize round counter
Loop (up to MAX_ROUNDS)
Phase A: Review
If MCP available:
mcp__llm-chat__chat:
system: "You are a senior ML reviewer (NeurIPS/ICML level)."
prompt: |
[Round N/MAX_ROUNDS of autonomous review loop]
[Full research context: claims, methods, results, known weaknesses]
[Changes since last round, if any]
1. Score this work 1-10 for a top venue
2. List remaining critical weaknesses (ranked by severity)
3. For each weakness, specify the MINIMUM fix
4. State clearly: is this READY for submission? Yes/No/Almost
Be brutally honest. If the work is ready, say so clearly.
CRITICAL: Save the FULL raw response verbatim. Then extract:
Score (numeric 1-10)
Verdict ("ready" / "almost" / "not ready")
Action items (ranked list of fixes)
STOP: If score >= 6 AND verdict contains "ready/almost"
Phase C: Implement Fixes
Priority: metric additions > reframing > new experiments
Phase D: Wait for Results
Monitor remote experiments
Phase E: Document Round
Append to AUTO_REVIEW.md:
## Round N (timestamp)
### Assessment (Summary)
- Score: X/10
- Verdict: [ready/almost/not ready]
- Key criticisms: [bullet list]
### Reviewer Raw Response
<details>
<summary>Click to expand full reviewer response</summary>
[Paste the COMPLETE raw response here — verbatim, unedited.]
</details>
### Actions Taken
- [what was implemented/changed]
### Results
- [experiment outcomes, if any]
### Status
- [continuing to round N+1 / stopping]
Write REVIEW_STATE.json with current state.
Termination
Set REVIEW_STATE.json status to "completed"
Write final summary
Key Rules
Large file handling: If the Write tool fails due to file size, immediately retry using Bash (cat << 'EOF' > file) to write in chunks. Do NOT ask the user for permission — just do it silently.
Anti-hallucination citations: When adding references, NEVER fabricate BibTeX. Use DBLP → CrossRef → [VERIFY] chain. Do NOT generate BibTeX from memory.
Be honest about weaknesses
Implement fixes BEFORE re-reviewing
Document everything
Include previous context in round 2+ prompts
Prefer MCP tool over curl when available
Prompt Template for Round 2+
mcp__llm-chat__chat:
system: "You are a senior ML reviewer (NeurIPS/ICML level)."
prompt: |
[Round N/MAX_ROUNDS of autonomous review loop]
## Previous Review Summary (Round N-1)
- Previous Score: X/10
- Previous Verdict: [ready/almost/not ready]
- Previous Key Weaknesses: [list]
## Changes Since Last Review
1. [Action 1]: [result]
2. [Action 2]: [result]
## Updated Results
[paste updated metrics/tables]
Please re-score and re-assess:
1. Score this work 1-10 for a top venue
2. List remaining critical weaknesses (ranked by severity)
3. For each weakness, specify the MINIMUM fix
4. State clearly: is this READY for submission? Yes/No/Almost
Be brutally honest. If the work is ready, say so clearly.
