Author interview
PerfectPaper asks targeted questions about design decisions and fixed constraints before review, then carries your answers into the critique.
SOLUTIONS
A prebuilt custom agent that checks HGVS variant syntax, versioned transcript references, and current HGNC gene symbols across a genomics manuscript.
Affiliations
Current platform
PerfectPaper now carries context from setup through research, revision, and export—without turning the paper into a generic writing prompt.
Prepare
PerfectPaper asks targeted questions about design decisions and fixed constraints before review, then carries your answers into the critique.
Search the journal catalogue, choose up to three targets, and compare compatible open-access journals before the review starts.
Brief up to three custom reviewers, declare ground truths, attach instructions, and choose standard or deep-research depth with specific tools.
Investigate
Specialist reviewers inspect the full paper in context, including figures and tables—not isolated paragraphs.
Deep-research reviewers can search the web and scholarly literature, inspect sources, and attach vetted citations to research-backed findings.
The reading room shows which review areas are working, which findings have arrived, and when a research step could not complete.
Revise
Move between each comment and its passage, read your paper as you wrote it in Word, filter feedback, and discuss any finding.
Preview suggested revisions, apply accepted changes, keep an edit history, and reverse a change without losing the review trail.
Export the revised paper and saved feedback as DOCX, annotated PDF, or print view, and prepare an anonymous copy for blinded review.
PerfectPaper’s nomenclature agent reads a genomics manuscript for variant and gene naming errors: variant strings that do not follow HGVS syntax, transcript references given without a version, protein and coding descriptions that disagree, and gene symbols that have been superseded or that collide with an alias. Copy the brief below into a custom agent slot.
This is the narrowest agent in the set and the fastest to act on. Nomenclature errors are unambiguous, they propagate into databases, and they are trivially fixable once found.
Paste this into a custom agent. Suggested settings: work type verification, skill level graduate, tools web search.
Name: Variant and gene nomenclature
You are reviewing a genomics manuscript for sequence variant and gene symbol
nomenclature. Examine the text, every table, and every figure caption.
Check and report:
1. HGVS syntax. Every variant should follow HGVS form with an explicit
reference sequence and a prefix indicating the coordinate system: c. for
coding, g. for genomic, p. for protein, n. for non-coding, m. for
mitochondrial. Report variants written without a prefix, written in legacy
forms, or using a substitution arrow instead of the accepted syntax.
2. Reference sequence. Every coding variant should name the transcript it is
numbered against, with a version suffix. Report transcripts given without a
version, and report variants given with no reference sequence at all.
Where different variants in the same gene use different transcripts,
report the inconsistency.
3. Protein notation. Protein-level changes should use three-letter amino acid
codes in HGVS form. Report one-letter forms, and report any protein
description that is inconsistent with the coding description given
alongside it, showing both.
4. Internal consistency. Compare every variant as it appears in the abstract,
the text, each table and each figure. Report any variant whose position,
reference allele or alternate allele differs between appearances. This is
the highest-value check in this brief; report these first.
5. Gene symbols. Report gene symbols that are not current HGNC-approved
symbols, including withdrawn symbols and aliases still common in older
literature. Report symbols that are ambiguous between species where the
species is not stated. Note that human symbols are conventionally
upper-case and mouse symbols title-case, and report inconsistent usage.
6. Genome build. Where genomic coordinates are given, determine whether the
build is stated. Coordinates without a build are uninterpretable; report
them.
Use web search only to confirm current HGNC symbol status where a symbol looks
superseded. Do not attempt to validate that a specific variant exists in any
database, and do not assert clinical significance.
Report every instance with its exact location and the corrected form.
| Failure | Downstream consequence |
|---|---|
| Variant with no reference transcript | Position is ambiguous across isoforms |
| Unversioned transcript accession | Numbering may shift between releases |
| Variant differs between table and text | Curators cannot tell which is correct |
| Superseded gene symbol | Paper is missed by symbol-based literature searches |
| Coordinates with no genome build | Position cannot be resolved at all |
The standing team includes a terminology and abbreviation consistency specialist, which catches inconsistent usage in general prose. It is not briefed on HGVS syntax, on transcript versioning, or on HGNC symbol status, all of which are formal conventions with specific correct forms rather than matters of consistent style.
This agent is cheap to run and worth a slot only when the paper reports specific variants. Otherwise spend the slot on multiple testing or data availability. Full set: AI peer review for genomics.
A standard syntax for describing sequence variants, maintained by the Human Genome Variation Society. It requires a reference sequence, a coordinate-system prefix, and a defined form for each variant type, so that a description resolves to exactly one change.
Coding coordinates are numbered against a specific transcript, and transcript records are revised over time. A variant given against an unversioned accession may refer to a different position depending on which release the reader consults.
No, and the brief instructs it not to. It checks that the variant is described unambiguously and consistently. Clinical interpretation is a separate task requiring curated evidence.
No. It checks that usage is internally consistent and that the species is clear, since human and mouse symbols differ by case convention and several symbols are shared across species.
Last updated September 9, 2026
Upload your paper and receive structured, sourced feedback before you submit.
Connection lost
Reconnecting…
Something went wrong on our end
Attempting to reconnect