Skill UI

This guide details how to position a manuscript against existing academic literature, specifically for journals like the Journal of Labor Economics (JOLE). It emphasizes moving beyond general literature reviews to making a precise 'stake'—clearly identifying the 2-3 closest papers, stating the gap they left open, and precisely articulating how your work adds novel identification, data, or mechanisms. It also details specific citation mechanics (Chicago author-date, chronological/alphabetical order).

A comprehensive guide for responding to peer reviews and compiling revision manuscripts for high-impact academic journals, specifically tailored for the Journal on Communications (JOC). It teaches authors how to structure closed-loop responses (Opinion—Response—Location), maintain a professional tone, provide verifiable evidence, and systematically address complex or conflicting critiques throughout the multi-round publication process.

This guide provides a highly structured framework for writing literature reviews for top international economics journals. It emphasizes moving beyond merely listing localized findings, focusing instead on establishing a clear dialogue with global academic classics, frontier research (e.g., GVC, global finance), and defining the paper's unique marginal contribution within the international academic lineage.

A comprehensive guide detailing the strategy and structure for author responses to peer reviews (rebuttals) in top-tier academic conferences like KDD. It covers the unique constraints, such as the prohibition of hyperlinks, how to anchor claims using specific coordinates (e.g., "Table 3, column 4"), and structuring responses to address multiple reviewer concerns while targeting the Area Chair's decision.

This comprehensive guide helps authors select and apply the appropriate EQUATOR reporting guideline (e.g., CONSORT for RCTs, PRISMA for systematic reviews) for various study designs. It mandates the inclusion of detailed, reconciled flow diagrams and fully mapped checklists, ensuring manuscripts meet the rigorous methodological standards of top-tier academic journals by preventing selective reporting and verifying data consistency across all sections.

This skill guides authors on the specific requirements for submitting manuscripts to Laser & Photonics Reviews. It helps determine if a manuscript should be a critical review or original research, ensuring the work meets the journal's high bar for synthesis, scope, and rigor in laser physics and photonics. Use this when aiming for a review-leaning venue and need to structure your contribution for maximum impact.

This skill generates validated local artifacts (PNG, JPEG, or PDF) from public HTTP(S) web URLs using the Latchshot service. It is ideal for creating visual reports, quality assurance documentation, or social media previews of public web content. Note that this tool only supports public pages and cannot access private, authenticated, or restricted content.

Performs a comprehensive security audit of Model Context Protocol (MCP) implementations, including servers, clients, and tools. This skill reviews code against critical security baselines (MCP-01 to MCP-05), OWASP MCP Top 10, and common Remote Code Execution (RCE) vectors (e.g., command injection, deserialization, SSRF). The output provides a detailed report with file and line references, ensuring compliance and identifying vulnerabilities before release. Use this when auditing network-exposed services or client security posture.

This comprehensive guide helps authors evaluate whether their philosophical manuscript meets the high standards required by leading generalist academic journals, such as Mind. It details criteria for originality, the development of rigorous arguments, deep engagement with opposing views, and adherence to specific structural and stylistic norms common in analytic philosophy. Use it as a critical pre-submission checklist to strengthen your scholarly contribution.

This guide teaches advanced academic writers how to structure their papers by positioning their thesis within an ongoing, live scholarly debate. It emphasizes engaging with the strongest, canonical versions of existing views, rather than summarizing literature or attacking strawmen. It helps authors define the precise gap their work fills and state their unique contribution clearly.

Provides a comprehensive, time-sensitive playbook for authors responding to reviews (rebuttals) at MLSys. It details how to triage objections, prioritize critical missing measurements, address systems objections regarding workload representativeness and baseline tuning, and structure anonymous, data-driven replies within a compressed rebuttal window.

This guide provides a structured methodology for authors responding to peer reviews in technical conferences (e.g., MobiSys). It emphasizes strict scope discipline, focusing only on correcting factual errors or answering specific reviewer questions. The process requires anchoring all claims to existing evidence and maintaining a double-blind approach to maximize acceptance chances.