Skill UI

A specialized methodology for reviewing APIs, configuration schemas, and interfaces to identify 'footguns'—design choices where the path of least resistance leads to insecurity. This analysis focuses on making secure usage the default, covering topics like dangerous defaults, primitive vs. semantic type safety, and insecure algorithm selection. It is crucial for architects and reviewers to prevent developer misuse at the design level.

This guide helps researchers elevate general empirical ideas (e.g., 'X affects Y') into rigorous, theory-driven accounting contributions. It outlines four sources of academic contribution, identifies key areas (auditing, financial accounting, governance), and teaches how to anchor research in specific accounting mechanisms and China's institutional context, meeting the standards of top-tier accounting journals.

This guide helps researchers determine if their microeconomic theory, model, or experiment is suitable for American Economic Journal: Microeconomics (AEJ: Micro). It provides a structured framework for evaluating the contribution's scope, assessing broad microeconomic interest, and differentiating the appropriate venue from competing specialist journals like JET, Econometrica, or AEJ: Applied.

This skill acts as a central workflow router for manuscripts targeting the American Economic Journal: Economic Policy (AEJ: Policy). It diagnoses the current stage of a paper—whether it's topic selection, design, modeling, writing, or rebuttal—and recommends the next specialized skill. It ensures the research maintains a strong focus on credible causal evidence and actionable policy implications.

This tool acts as a comprehensive router, guiding users through the specific stages of writing a short-format manuscript for American Economic Review: Insights (AER: Insights). It helps structure the process from initial topic selection and identifying a single core insight, through literature positioning, model refinement, and final submission/rebuttal preparation, ensuring compliance with strict length and scope requirements.

The American Journal of Sociology (AJS) prizes theoretical ambition and general significance over subfield novelty. This guide provides a rigorous framework and a four-part test to help researchers pressure-test their ideas. It assesses whether a project engages with the broadest sociological debates, possesses a portable theoretical payoff, and is framed for the most appropriate academic venue (AJS vs. ASR).

This guide helps researchers determine if an interesting phenomenon or trend constitutes a genuine theoretical puzzle suitable for the Academy of Management Review (AMR). It guides users to distinguish between a simple topic, an empirical test, and a deep theoretical contradiction that requires building new knowledge-based claims.

This guide serves as a specialized workflow router for authors writing invited review articles for the Annual Review of Economics (ARE). It maps the entire lifecycle, from initial topic selection and proposal framing to systematic literature synthesis, framework imposition, evidence appraisal, and final revision, ensuring the resulting article is authoritative and comprehensive.

This guide serves as a comprehensive router for authors preparing an invited review article for the Annual Review of Psychology (ARPsych). It outlines the systematic, multi-stage process, guiding authors through topic selection, literature synthesis, framework development, writing style refinement, and final submission/revision, ensuring the final piece is authoritative and comprehensive.

This workflow guides the entire process of writing an authoritative, invited review article for the Annual Review of Sociology (ARSoc). It systematically routes the author through the academic lifecycle, covering stages from topic selection and systematic literature synthesis to imposing an organizing framework and final revision, ensuring the output is a comprehensive analytical map of a subfield.

Provides comprehensive guidance for researchers deciding the optimal conference venue for Software Engineering (SE) research. It distinguishes between contributions that focus on *automation* (techniques or tools that automate SE tasks) suitable for ASE, versus those that are broad empirical findings, theoretical results, or pure ML advances, directing them to venues like ICSE, FSE, or ISSTA.

A comprehensive, step-by-step guide for researchers planning and executing a submission to the ASE (Automated Software Engineering) conference. Covers the entire academic lifecycle, from initial topic selection and evidence gathering (reproducibility) to abstract registration, double-anonymous submission, navigating the early-rejection gate, rebuttal, criteria-bound revision, and final camera-ready artifact submission.