Browse reusable Agent Skills, each with a clear purpose and practical guidance.
Use when making the inferential backbone of a Review of Economic Dynamics (RED) manuscript credible, adapting to the paper type. For theoretical/computational papers it covers model assumptions, regularity conditions, and what disciplines the parameters; for empirical dynamic papers it covers causal design. RED's scope spans all three, so this skill branches accordingly.
Use when positioning a Review of Economic Dynamics (RED) manuscript within the dynamic-economics and SED literature — mapping the quantitative-macro lineage a paper builds on, citing in author-year style, and making the marginal advance legible to the Society for Economic Dynamics readership rather than a generalist audience.
Use when testing whether a research question fits the Review of Economic Dynamics (RED) — a journal whose scope is defined by method and lens (dynamic, quantitative economics) rather than subfield. Helps decide if the paper studies a genuinely dynamic mechanism through a dynamic model, and whether it belongs at RED versus a generalist or a specialist outlet.
Use when targeting Reports on Progress in Physics (RoPP) or deciding whether a physics review manuscript fits this IOP authoritative progress-report venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, method-and-evidence bar, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.
Use when executing and stress-testing the empirical analysis for a Research Policy (RP) manuscript — building bibliometric/patent variables, running estimation or qualitative coding, and assembling robustness that an innovation-studies referee will accept. Executes the analysis; it does not choose the design (respol-methods) or present exhibits (respol-tables-figures).
Use when research design, identification, or measurement is the bottleneck for a Research Policy (RP) manuscript — choosing and defending a method (patent/bibliometric, causal policy evaluation, survey, case study, or mixed) appropriate to an innovation-studies claim. Sets the design; it does not execute the estimation/coding (respol-data-analysis).
Use when calibrating expectations and choreography for the Research Policy (RP) review cycle — the double-blind process, the out-of-scope desk screen, handling-editor routing, the Research Note option, and what RP referees reward versus reject. Sets expectations; it does not draft the response letter (respol-rebuttal).
Use when scoping or sanity-checking the research question for a Research Policy (RP) manuscript — deciding whether it is a genuine innovation-studies question RP owns versus an economics/strategy paper that will desk-reject as out of scope. Frames the question; it does not build the theory (respol-theory-development) or stake the gap (respol-literature-positioning).
Use when the causal-identification or measurement strategy is the bottleneck for a The Review of Economics and Statistics (REStat) manuscript — a DID / RD / IV / shift-share design, or a measurement / measurement-error problem. Stress-tests the design to REStat's applied-econometrics-and-measurement bar before exhibits are finalized.
Use when the headline estimate of a The Review of Economics and Statistics (REStat) manuscript needs to survive specification, sample, measurement, and inference choices before submission. Builds the robustness suite that REStat referees expect; it does not establish the primary identification.