Browse reusable Agent Skills, each with a clear purpose and practical guidance.
Use when writing a PPoPP author-response rebuttal, covering the short fixed word-capped window, answering the recurring "does it scale?" and "what about baseline X?" questions with pre-run numbers, correcting factual misreadings of a concurrency argument, staying double-blind, and prioritizing the points that can actually move a decision.
Use when a Physical Review Letters result is correct but its central claim and broad significance are not yet sharp. Structures the one-claim narrative; does not run analysis or design figures.
Use when polishing the prose of a Physical Review Letters manuscript for APS house style, concision, precise notation, and out-of-subfield readability. Polishes language; does not restructure the result or manage length budget.
Use when setting the scope of a Psychological Review theory — what it explains, what it does NOT, and (for formal models) whether its parameters are identifiable. Bounds the theory; it does NOT derive its predictions (psychrev-argument-development) or frame its advance over rivals (psychrev-contribution-framing).
Use when articulating the theoretical advance of a Psychological Review manuscript — what the field can explain after the paper that it could not before, stated against the specific prior models it improves on. Frames the contribution; it does NOT build the model (psychrev-theory-construction) or position it in the literature (psychrev-literature-positioning).
Use when targeting 《财政研究》(Public Finance Research — 财政部主管、中国财政学会主办、不收版面费的财政学权威核心月刊, CNKI 采编系统) or deciding whether a Chinese public-finance manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, abstract/keyword/citation house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.
Use to stake a Quantitative Economics (QE) manuscript's contribution against the frontier — what quantitative gap it closes relative to prior empirical, structural, and methodological work, and against its Econometric Society siblings. Positions the paper; it does not write a standalone literature survey.
Use when a Quarterly Journal of Economics (QJE) manuscript has a credible empirical result but no conceptual frame — to add the model or framework that turns a coefficient into a lesson with broad implications. Frames the result conceptually; it does not redesign the identification.
Use when scoping or pressure-testing a research question for a Quarterly Journal of Economics (QJE) submission — checks fit, the "big idea" bar, and breadth of the takeaway for QJE's general-interest readership. Diagnoses scope fit; it does not design the empirics.
Use when polishing prose, abstract, and introduction for a Quarterly Journal of Economics (QJE) manuscript so the big idea lands fast for a general-interest reader. Reflects QJE's house style — long, ambitious, narrative-driven empirical papers. Polishes exposition; it does not change results or design.