Use when targeting Trends in Food Science & Technology or deciding whether a food-science review manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's review-only fit, the critical-synthesis and comprehensiveness bar, structure expectations, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.
SkillScore91Maintained
Automatic
◆Research pack
Last verified 8/15/2026
What it changes
Passed 20 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 8 of 22 without it.
Without skill36%
With skill91%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
The response evaluates manuscript fit as Low.
The response includes the bracketed tag [Fit].
The response evaluates manuscript fit as High.
and 12 more in the full report
13 fixed7 passed either way1 still failing1 broke
Pass-rate lift
+55 pp
Tokens
+24%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-47%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/15/2026v120 of 22 cases passed with skill
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 13 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 13
Prompt
An invited, authoritative synthesis reviews thirty years of global land-use change and environmental resource governance across international food supply networks.
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
The response recommends annual-review-of-environment-and-resources as the re-route target.
Missed
Passed
case-10 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/15/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md116 linessingle file
Trends in Food Science & Technology (trends-in-food-science-and-technology)
Journal positioning
Trends in Food Science & Technology is the Elsevier review and synthesis journal for food
science and technology — critical reviews, trend analyses, and opinion that frame the
state and direction of a field. Its defining expectation is critical synthesis, not new
primary data: a comprehensive, evaluative account that integrates the existing literature,
identifies what is settled and what is contested, and points to research gaps and emerging
directions. A manuscript whose core contribution is original experimental results is the
single largest desk-reject risk here, regardless of quality. This skill is a fit /
venue-selection / re-framing tool. It does not replace the journal's current author
guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live Trends in Food Science & Technology guidance.
When to trigger
The author names Trends in Food Science & Technology and wants a fit check for a review or
trend article in food science.
A body of primary work needs to be re-framed as a critical, gap-identifying synthesis
rather than submitted as a primary-research paper.
The author is choosing between a review venue and a primary-research food journal, or is
unsure whether their topic is "review-ready."
The author needs this journal's comprehensiveness/critical-synthesis bar and desk-reject heuristics.
Scope & topic fit
Critical reviews across food chemistry, processing, engineering, microbiology, nutrition,
safety, packaging, and sustainability that evaluate rather than merely catalog the literature.
Trend and forward-looking articles on emerging technologies, ingredients, or paradigms
(e.g., novel processing, alternative proteins, clean-label, digital/food-tech).
Methodological or conceptual syntheses that reconcile conflicting findings and propose a
framework or research agenda.
Systematic or scoping reviews and meta-analyses with a transparent, reproducible search
and selection protocol.
Cross-cutting topics connecting food technology to health, sustainability, or regulation
when treated as a synthesis for a broad food-science readership.
Authoritative tutorials on a maturing technique only when they add critical evaluation, not
a how-to manual.