--- name: ngeo-workflow description: Use when deciding which ngeo-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from scope-fit through revision for a Nature Geoscience (Nat. Geosci.) manuscript. Routes — does not replace — the specialized skills. --- # Nature Geoscience Workflow (ngeo-workflow) ## Overview This is the router. It does not do any one stage's work; it tells you **which ngeo-* skill to use at your current stage** and in what order. Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, the target is **Nature Geoscience** — a Nature Portfolio flagship that publishes Earth-system advances of broad, cross-disciplinary interest across the solid Earth, atmosphere, oceans, cryosphere, climate, and planetary science. The winning manuscript is not the most thorough regional case study; it is the one whose quantitative result changes how the wider Earth-science community understands a process. If the work is a solid but locally-scoped or specialist advance, its home is a community journal (JGR, GRL, Climate of the Past, EGU/AGU titles, or *Nature Communications* / *Communications Earth & Environment*), and `ngeo-scope-fit` will say so. ## When to trigger - User asks "what should I do next?" on an Earth-science manuscript - User drops a draft and needs the current bottleneck diagnosed - User is unsure whether the result is "Nature Geoscience-worthy" or belongs in a community journal - The Article is over the 3,000-word limit and material must be re-partitioned into Methods / Supplementary - User received a Nature Portfolio editor or referee decision and needs to switch into response mode ## Routing table | Current symptom | Next skill | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------| | Unsure if the result is broad / important enough for Nat. Geosci. | `ngeo-scope-fit` | | Result is real but the "why the whole field cares" is unclear | `ngeo-results-framing` | | Methods sprawl into the main text; unsure what goes to online Methods | `ngeo-methods` | | Figures too dense / lead figure does not show the Earth-system advance | `ngeo-figures` | | Main text depends on Supplementary Information to be understood | `ngeo-supplementary` | | Prose is wordy, jargon-heavy, or not accessible to non-specialists | `ngeo-writing-style` | | Over the 3,000-word / display-item / reference limit | `ngeo-length-management` | | Need a cover letter arguing broad interest to the diverse readership | `ngeo-cover-letter` | | Ready to submit; need format / files / reporting-summary preflight | `ngeo-submission` | | Choosing suggested/excluded referees; anticipating objections | `ngeo-referee-strategy` | | Received referee reports or an editor decision; need to respond | `ngeo-revision` | ## Default order 1. `ngeo-scope-fit` — settle the broad-interest Earth-system gate first; redirect to a community journal if it fails 2. `ngeo-results-framing` — lock the single headline advance and its "Here we show" statement 3. `ngeo-methods` — build the online Methods section that grounds every quantitative claim in data or model diagnostics 4. `ngeo-figures` — design a lead figure that carries the Earth-system result and its uncertainty 5. `ngeo-supplementary` — partition extended data, model output, and derivations to SI; keep the main text self-contained 6. `ngeo-writing-style` — Nature house style, "accessible to non-specialists," calibrated claims 7. `ngeo-length-management` — fit the 3,000-word Article budget and 4–6 display-item ceiling (do this AFTER content is stable) 8. `ngeo-cover-letter` — argue broad interest to the in-house editor who triages before review 9. `ngeo-submission` — final preflight (Editorial Manager files, reporting summary, data/code availability) 10. `ngeo-referee-strategy` — suggested / excluded referees; pre-empt likely objections 11. `ngeo-revision` — after the referee reports arrive > `ngeo-writing-style` and `ngeo-length-management` are **late polish stages**. Do not trim to 3,000 words before the headline advance, Methods, and figures are stable, or you will cut the wrong material. ## Decision heuristics - "Reviewer 2 will say 'this is a regional study, why not JGR?'" → `ngeo-scope-fit` - "I can state my measurement but not what it changes about the Earth system" → `ngeo-results-framing` - "My Methods are three pages of instrument and model detail" → `ngeo-methods` - "My lead figure is a six-panel map grid with a 12-line caption" → `ngeo-figures` - "You can't read the main text without the Supplementary" → `ngeo-supplementary` - "I'm 800 words over and have seven figures" → `ngeo-length-management` - "The editor needs to see why this is cross-disciplinary" → `ngeo-cover-letter` - "Submitting tonight; is the Reporting Summary done?" → `ngeo-submission` - "Who should I suggest as a referee?" → `ngeo-referee-strategy` - "Three referee reports just landed" → `ngeo-revision` ## Manuscript status board Readiness is a two-column question: is the *content* settled, and does it *fit the Nature Article container*? Fill this board before invoking `ngeo-submission`; any cell still marked OPEN routes you back to the named skill. ```text NATURE GEOSCIENCE STATUS BOARD verdict owner skill ========================================= ======== ===================== GATE broad Earth-system interest + OPEN ngeo-scope-fit quantitative advance (fails → retarget community journal) CLAIM one headline advance, framed as OPEN ngeo-results-framing "Here we show ..." for the field METH online Methods grounds every claim OPEN ngeo-methods in data / model diagnostics + error FIG lead figure = the advance + its OPEN ngeo-figures uncertainty, map/section legible SI main text self-contained; SI holds OPEN ngeo-supplementary extended data / model output only STYLE accessible to non-specialists, OPEN ngeo-writing-style claims calibrated to evidence FIT inside 3,000 words + 4-6 display OPEN ngeo-length-management items + ~50 refs CASE cover letter argues broad interest OPEN ngeo-cover-letter DATA data + code availability + Reporting OPEN ngeo-submission Summary complete REFS suggested / excluded referees named OPEN ngeo-referee-strategy ----------------------------------------- -------- --------------------- all rows CLOSED → ngeo-submission preflight → submit on Editorial Manager referee reports arrive → ngeo-revision ``` ## Differences vs. community Earth-science journals Nature Geoscience and community titles (JGR, GRL, Climate Dynamics, *Communications Earth & Environment*) share peer-review rigor but differ on the **gate**: - **Nature Geoscience**: a broad, cross-disciplinary Earth-system advance, editor-triaged for general interest before review. A rigorous but regionally-scoped or incremental result is declined without review on interest grounds. - **Community journals**: thorough, specialist-appropriate, archival; regional and incremental advances are welcome and length is generous. If `ngeo-scope-fit` returns a "specialist / regional" verdict, retarget rather than fighting the broad-interest bar. ## Anti-patterns - **Do not** skip `ngeo-scope-fit` — Nature editors desk-reject the majority of submissions before review on interest grounds; a wrong-venue manuscript wastes a cycle - **Do not** run `ngeo-length-management` before content is stable — you will cut load-bearing evidence or uncertainty - **Do not** let the Supplementary Information become a dump the main text silently depends on - **Do not** treat data/code availability and the Reporting Summary as afterthoughts — they gate acceptance, not just submission > Durable norms only. Verify current word/display-item/reference limits, content types, formats, and policies on the official Nature Geoscience author pages (Checked: 2026-07-16).