Browse reusable Agent Skills, each with a clear purpose and practical guidance.
Use to understand how Social Psychology Quarterly (SPQ) evaluates a manuscript — masked (blinded) review, the blinding check that temporarily rejects under-blinded papers, what reviewers from different sociological-social-psychology traditions weigh, and the reject / revise-and-resubmit / accept decision pattern. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.
Use when targeting 《科学学研究》(Studies in Science of Science — 中国科学学与科技政策研究会等合办的科学学权威刊, 1983 年创刊, 匿名审稿) or deciding whether a Chinese science-of-science/innovation manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, anonymized-submission house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.
Use when targeting 《系统工程理论与实践》(Systems Engineering Theory and Practice — 中国系统工程学会会刊, 中国科协主管, 1981 年创刊月刊, 国自然管理科学 A 级 / EI 收录) or deciding whether a Chinese systems-engineering/management-science manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, abstract/citation house style, review timeline, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.
Use when targeting 《税务研究》(Taxation Research — 中国税务杂志社主办的税务学术月刊, 在线投约稿系统 tg.ctax.org.cn) or deciding whether a Chinese tax/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 when targeting World Bank Economic Review (WBER) or deciding whether a development-economics 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 targeting 《世界经济文汇》(World Economic Papers — 复旦大学经济学院主办的双月刊, 国内较早实行双向匿名审稿的经济学刊) or deciding whether an international-economics/open-economy manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's double-blind review, 摘要≤200字/3关键词/音序参考文献 house style, official re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.
Use to understand how World Politics evaluates a manuscript — triple-blind review with author anonymity preserved through the editorial decision, at least two non-Princeton reviewers and often an editor, a roughly four-month decision target, scope screening, and the APSA human-subjects requirement. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.
Use when running and reporting the analysis for an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial statistics and modeling, remote-sensing accuracy, or qualitative coding and interpretation. Sets analysis and reporting norms across the four areas; it does not choose the design.
Use when defending the research design of an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial/quantitative analysis and GIScience, remote-sensing and physical-environmental methods, qualitative human-geography inference, or nature-society mixed methods. The Annals judges each tradition on its own terms. Strengthens the design; it does not write code.
Use when you need to understand how the Annals of the American Association of Geographers evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymous review routed through a subject editor by area, 1-3 referees (one being the editor or designate), decision categories, and what desk-rejects a paper. Sets expectations; it does not write the paper or the response letter.