A pre-submission checklist for IEEE and ACM papers
Every venue has a submission checklist buried somewhere in its call for papers, and almost nobody reads the whole thing until something gets rejected on a technicality. Page limits, anonymization requirements for double-blind review, specific formatting rules that vary between conferences even within the same publisher — it's a lot of small, boring requirements, and boring is exactly why they get missed.
The anonymization one trips people up more than you'd expect. Double-blind review usually means stripping author names, but also things people forget: acknowledgments sections that name a specific lab or grant, file metadata in the PDF that still has your name in it, a GitHub link in a footnote that goes straight to your personal account, or a sentence like "as we showed in our earlier work [12]" that's about as anonymous as putting your name in the abstract.
Bibliography formatting rules are the other repeat offender — IEEE and ACM have different expectations for how references should be structured, and "close enough" is usually not actually close enough once a proceedings editor runs a formatting check. (The .bib file itself has its own set of quiet failure modes — duplicates, broken cite keys, uncited entries — covered in a separate guide.)
None of these are hard problems. They're just numerous, easy to lose track of across multiple drafts, and the kind of thing you want checked automatically rather than trusting yourself to remember at 2am before a deadline. PreSubmit runs your manuscript against a venue's actual requirements (you can point it at the CFP page or paste the requirements directly), flags anonymity issues heuristically — it's not a guarantee, more of a second pair of eyes — and checks the bibliography and document structure at the same time, sorted by how bad each issue actually is.
It won't replace reading the CFP. It will catch the things you'd only notice after someone else pointed them out.