Film 0121s
Every rule.
38 checks per journal, run on every line. From heading order to reference style, nothing in your submission rides on luck.
The review agent
Your paper, read like a reviewer reads it.
Seven review agents read your manuscript against your target journal's own rules and hand back native Word tracked changes, every one cited. You accept or reject each, inside Word.
15,000
journals trained on
38
rule checks / journal
~4 min
median full review
waraqMAX MODE
WARAQ SCORE
82/100
The results utilise use a mixed-methods design.
RULE APA-7.12
Meet Reviewer 2
Meet Reviewer 2. Before the journal does.
Waraq reads your manuscript like the harshest reviewer, then hands you every fix as real Word tracked changes. In minutes, not months.
Tracked changes
Every fix, as real Word edits.
Cited
Every change cites a real rule.
Minutes
Reviewed while your coffee's hot.
Journal rules
Reviewed against your target journal.
Your voice
Still your words, still your paper.
Published
Built to get past the desk.
Your first paper, published, not desk-rejected.
The review
What comes back to your desk.
Not a chat transcript. A reviewed file with tracked changes you accept or reject inside Word, findings cited to your journal's rules, a score you can defend, and a reviewer you can question.
The results suggest the intervention was very effective associated with a 23% improvement across all cohorts, although attrition in the control group was not fully reported is reported in Table S2.
Clarity · §3.1 · accepted ✓
Quantify the effect size; replace the qualitative claim.
PRISMA 2020 · §17
Report attrition for every arm. Now cited to Table S2.
Waraq score
74/ 100
Structure82
Clarity71
Citations68
Journal fit74
Ready to resubmit after 14 accepted changes.
Ask the reviewer
Why flag the attrition sentence?
PRISMA 2020 §17 asks for attrition reported in every arm. Your counts already exist in Table S2, so the revision cites them and the journal's reviewer never has to go looking.
PRISMA 2020 · §17
Upload your paper →
Runs on your own paper, in the app.
Inside the app
Seven agents. One review.
A Waraq review is not one model's opinion. Seven specialised agents run on your manuscript in sequence, each with one job, each writing its edits and citations into the same tracked-changes file.
IMRaD order matches the journal template
Abstract at 247 of 250 words
Limitations missing from Discussion — edit written
12 hedged claims rewritten as findings
Passive voice cut from 31% to 14%
'very effective' — quantified, edit written
41 references restyled to the journal's format
2 references never cited in text — flagged
DOIs and years checked against the list
PRISMA 2020 checklist, all 27 items
Attrition missing for control arm — cited to Table S2
Sampling and power reporting present
Effect sizes reported with confidence intervals
3 claims resized to what the data shows
No result stated beyond the tested cohorts
Every citation exists — nothing fabricated
Limitations stated in the authors' own words
Attrition and exclusions on the record
Scope match against the journal's aims
Formatted to the journal's template
Word count 4,800 of 5,000 — inside the limit
One file back · every edit signed by the agent that made it
The campaign
The work, in motion.
Three short films from the review desk. Every rule checked, every rejection headed off, every minute accounted for.
Film 0220s
Rejected.
Most desk rejections are never explained. Waraq finds the trigger, cites the rule behind it, and fixes it before an editor ever sees your file.
Film 0325s
Minutes.
A full seven-agent review at a median of four minutes, returned as tracked changes while your coffee is still hot.
Journal fit
Matched against 15,000 journals. Not a guess.
Waraq is trained on the published rules of over fifteen thousand journals. Paste your abstract or a topic, and it ranks the ones that actually fit, then reviews your paper against the winner's exact guidelines.
mixed-methods study, adolescent mental health, MENA region
Top matchesRANKED BY FIT
L
The Lancet Regional Health
Elsevier · Q1
94
% fit
B
BMJ Open
BMJ · Q1
90
% fit
F
Frontiers in Public Health
Frontiers · Q2
86
% fit
Find your journal →
Every match is scored against the journal's real scope, method preferences, and formatting rules, not a keyword guess. Pick one, and the review runs against its exact guidelines.
Trained on the published rules of journals from
ElsevierSpringerTaylor & FrancisSAGEMDPIFrontiersBMJ
The research agent
Your next paper starts before you write it.
While you work, the Research Agent reads what publishes in your field, flags the questions nobody has answered, ranks the journals that would want the answer, and hands your draft straight to the seven-agent review.
SCAN
Reads the new literature in your field, week by week.
GAP
Flags the questions nobody has answered yet.
TARGET
Ranks journals by real scope and method fit.
REVIEW
Hands your draft to the seven-agent review.
scanning 214 new papers in your field
Gap found
No study pairs this method with your population.
target · Q1 journal · fit 92%
The results utilise use a mixed-methods design.
RULE APA-7.12 · plain language
Pricing · two ways to review
Start this week. Publish this year.
One plan, two review modes. A fast Desk Review to screen a clean draft, a deep Peer Review when the argument needs a senior reader. Less than one submission fee.
Researcher
Everything you need for a weekA full publication cycle
$9.99$25
per weekper month
720 Desk Reviews a weeka month
14 Peer Reviews MAX MODE
Research Agent and journal fit
Best value: 4 deep Peer Reviews a month, the full research loop.
Continue to checkout →
SECURE CHECKOUT VIA POLAR·CANCEL ANYTIME
Sign in with email and a one-time code. See results in minutes.
Human presubmission review runs $149 to $799 per manuscript.
Desk Review
FAST · SECONDS · EVERYDAY DRAFTS
The desk editor's first screen. Formatting, citation style, structure, and reference completeness against your target journal, returned as tracked changes in seconds.
Peer Review
MAX MODE · BEST AI MODELS · A FEW MINUTES
A senior reviewer's read. Argument, evidence, method soundness, and the gaps that trigger a revise or reject, each point cited to a rule. Our best AI models, for the papers that matter.
The agent picks the mode for you.
It reads the draft first: a Desk Review for a clean paper, a Peer Review when the argument needs work. You spend your deep reviews only where they count.
Why Waraq, not a chatbot
How it works: a Desk Review is a quick pass, a Peer Review is a full read. Your plan includes both and refills automatically.
Your manuscript, reviewed.
Waraq edits your writing. It does not write for you. Upload your paper and see results in minutes.