Browse reusable Agent Skills, each with a clear purpose and practical guidance.
Use when targeting RAND Journal of Economics or deciding whether an industrial-organization manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, method-and-evidence bar, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.
Use when the conceptual argument is the bottleneck for a Research Policy (RP) manuscript — building an innovation-studies mechanism or framework that an interdisciplinary readership will accept as a contribution. Builds the theory; it does not run the analysis (respol-data-analysis) or write the final contribution paragraph (respol-contribution-framing).
Use when positioning a The Review of Economic Studies (REStud) manuscript against the closest related work — confronting the nearest papers and stating the marginal contribution precisely. Sharpens positioning; does not write the full introduction or run empirics.
Use when building, sharpening, or stress-testing the theoretical model in a The Review of Economic Studies (REStud) manuscript — whether a pure-theory paper or an empirical paper with a model — and when routing proofs to the online appendix. Develops the model and its economic payoff; does not run the empirics.
Use when polishing the prose of a The Review of Economic Studies (REStud) manuscript — introduction, abstract, and overall economy of exposition — so the original contribution reads clearly and elegantly. Polishes writing; does not change results, design, or model.
Use when results exist but the "so what for accounting" is thin for a Review of Accounting Studies (RAST) manuscript — turning estimates or propositions into one sharp, defensible accounting contribution. Sharpens the claim; it does not position against the literature (revacc-literature-positioning) or polish the prose (revacc-writing-style).
Use when the prose is the bottleneck for a Review of Accounting Studies (RAST) manuscript — front-loading the contribution, writing an abstract and introduction that land, and adopting the accounting house voice. Polishes the manuscript; it does not sharpen the contribution claim (revacc-contribution-framing) or build exhibits (revacc-tables-figures).
Use when the related-work framing is the bottleneck for a The Review of Financial Studies (RFS) manuscript — defining the precise delta against JF/JFE/RFS and prior literature. Builds positioning, not the empirical design or the topic itself.
Use when positioning a Review of Finance (RoF) manuscript against the finance frontier — citing the right top-three work, honoring RoF's strict author-responsibility citation norm, and staking the contribution without a standalone survey.
Use when revising a Review of Finance manuscript for a 150-word abstract, double-blind wording, Chicago-style references, first-order finance framing, two-round review discipline, and 60-page total manuscript constraint.