Claude Skills by brycewang-stanford

Use when judging whether a pure-mathematics result clears the Annals of Mathematics importance and originality bar and falls within scope, before investing in framing or submission. Assesses fit and significance; does not evaluate whether the proof is correct (that is the proof's job).

Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for an Annals of Mathematics manuscript — AMS-LaTeX compile, theorem environments, abstract and MSC, references, arXiv, figures, and portal logistics. Checks readiness; does not assess significance (anmath-scope-fit) or correctness (anmath-referee-strategy).

Use when deciding what belongs in appendices versus the main text of a pure-mathematics manuscript for Annals of Mathematics — technical/auxiliary results, long computations, and machine-assisted computation. Math journals generally have no science-style "supplemental material"; everything essential stays in the main text.

Use when deciding which anmath-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing work on a pure-mathematics manuscript from scope check through major revision for an Annals of Mathematics submission. Routes — does not replace — the specialized skills.

Use when drafting the cover letter (and optional presubmission inquiry) for a Cancer Cell (Cell Press) submission — framing significance, fit, novelty, and suggested/excluded reviewers. It writes the letter; it does not edit the manuscript itself.

Use when assembling ethics approvals and availability statements for a Cancer Cell (Cell Press) manuscript — IACUC animal approval, human-sample IRB/consent, biosafety, and data/code deposition statements. It governs compliance declarations; it does not design experiments or write methods detail.

Use when building or auditing multi-panel mechanistic figures and tables for a Cancer Cell (Cell Press) manuscript — quantification of images, panel logic, image integrity, and legends. It shapes display items; it does not choose statistical tests or write the abstract.

Use when responding to Cancer Cell (Cell Press) reviewer reports — planning new experiments, writing a point-by-point response, and calibrating claims for revision. It structures the rebuttal and revision; it does not run the experiments or design them from scratch.

Use when assembling STAR Methods and the Key Resources Table for a Cancer Cell (Cell Press) manuscript, and when ensuring rigor / reproducibility (cell-line authentication, mycoplasma, antibody validation, ARRIVE animal reporting, data/code deposition). It governs reporting; it does not design experiments.

Use when deciding whether a molecular / translational oncology study belongs in Cancer Cell (Cell Press) before investing in full submission. Diagnoses mechanism + translational-relevance fit; it does not design experiments or edit prose.

Use when defining n, choosing statistical tests, correcting for multiple comparisons, and reporting error bars for a Cancer Cell (Cell Press) manuscript. Focuses on biological statistics and avoiding pseudo-replication; it does not design experiments or build figures.

Use when writing the Cancer Cell (Cell Press) front matter — the Summary, eTOC blurb, Highlights, and graphical abstract. It crafts these short items for accuracy and impact; it does not write Results or calibrate statistics.

Use when designing or auditing the experimental plan for a Cancer Cell (Cell Press) study — orthogonal validation across in vitro, in vivo, and human tumor systems, with controls, replicates, power, randomization, and blinding. It plans design; it does not run statistics or write figures.

Use when running the final pre-submission preflight for Cancer Cell (Cell Press) — file completeness, STAR Methods / Key Resources Table, deposition accessions, statistics reporting, ethics statements, figure integrity, and portal logistics. It is the last gate before submitting.

Use when deciding which cc-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a Cancer Cell (Cell Press) manuscript from scope check through peer-review revision. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.

Use when polishing prose for a Cancer Cell (Cell Press) manuscript — the Summary/Introduction/Results/Discussion craft, claim calibration, and Cell Press nomenclature/house style. It edits language and framing; it does not design experiments or build figures.

Use to convert references to Cell Press author–date style — in-text "(Smith et al., 2021)", an alphabetical reference list by first author with full author lists, journal names spelled out. This is the OPPOSITE of Science's numbered-by-appearance style.

Use to build Cell's data and code deposition plan and the Data and Code Availability statement that lives inside STAR Methods Resource Availability — approved repositories, accessions/DOIs at submission, and Cell's three-bullet availability format with Mendeley Data as Elsevier's default.

Use to finalize Cell Press display items — column-width sizing, minimum fonts, RGB, show-the-data with defined error bars/n/replicate type, scale bars, colorblind-safe palettes, multi-panel discipline, stand-alone legends, and image integrity.

Use first, before any writing, to stress-test whether a study clears Cell's bar — a complete, mechanistic, hypothesis-driven story with converging evidence. Decides Cell vs Molecular Cell vs Cell Reports vs Cell Reports Medicine.

Use to lock the single narrative arc before drafting — converts a set of correct results into one Cell-shaped story that runs hypothesis → mechanism → significance, not a list of experiments.

Use to produce the three signature Cell front-matter artifacts — Highlights (3–4 bullets, each ≤85 characters), the eTOC/In Brief blurb (~50 words, third-person), and the Graphical Abstract (single-panel visual summary). Late-stage polish.

Use after Cell reviews arrive to triage the decision, prioritize the (often substantial) new experiments by impact × feasibility, and draft a point-by-point response that is respectful, evidence-led, and closes the "completeness" gaps reviewers demand. Do not run before the experiments and revision are actually done.

Use to build Cell's mandatory STAR Methods — the Key Resources Table, the three Resource Availability subsections, Experimental Model and Subject Details, Method Details, and Quantification and Statistical Analysis, in the exact required order.

Use as the final preflight before submitting to Cell — a complete checklist across significance, narrative, Highlights/eTOC/Graphical Abstract, Summary, figures, STAR Methods, data, references, and required files. Bundles the checklist and cover-letter templates.

Use to write Cell's Summary — a single unstructured paragraph of ≤ ~150 words that conveys the complete story, the mechanism, and the broad significance, quantified and readable by a general life-scientist. Late-stage polish.

Use when deciding which cell-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a manuscript from significance test through reviewer rebuttal for Cell (Cell Press). Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills.

Use to structure a Cell Article and hold its length — Summary, Introduction, Results, Discussion, STAR Methods, figure legends, references — with main-text length and display-item budgets, and Results subheadings driving the single arc.

Use when writing or polishing the English abstract and contribution statement for a 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) manuscript — producing a tight English abstract (≤ ~100 words per the journal's guideline) that reads to a field economist and benchmarks the contribution against specific papers. Use at the polish stage, after identification and results are final.

Use when building or auditing the exhibits of a 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) manuscript — favoring figures over tables (event-study plots, bin-scatter, model-fit / counterfactual figures) so the main result is legible at a glance, since many readers consume the English abstract plus figures. Use after identification and mechanism are settled.

Use to judge whether a manuscript is on-target for 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) before investing in revision — CEQ is the strictest Chinese econ journal on identification and the most internationally legible. If the fit is weak, re-route to economic-research / china-industrial-economics / journal-of-financial-research / journal-of-world-economy.

Use when the identification strategy is the bottleneck for a 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) manuscript — either a structural model with credible parameters, or a clean quasi-experiment (DID / IV / RDD / event-study). CEQ is the strictest Chinese econ journal here; identification assumptions must be made explicit and each defended. Stress-test the design before drafting exhibits.

Use when scrutinizing statistical inference for a 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) manuscript — choosing and justifying the clustering level, handling weak instruments with robust inference, correcting for multiple hypothesis testing, and reporting standard errors that survive a technical reviewer. Default robust SEs are rarely enough at CEQ.

Use when positioning a 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) manuscript's contribution against the literature — benchmarking the precise method/result delta versus specific field papers (English + Chinese), not piling citations. Use after the topic is set and before/alongside identification.

Use when a 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) manuscript has a credible main effect but the channel/mechanism is asserted rather than evidenced — to design tests that distinguish competing channels and provide falsifiable mechanism evidence. Use after identification is settled.

Use when a 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) manuscript uses difference-in-differences with staggered adoption or heterogeneous treatment effects — to bring it into compliance with modern estimators (Callaway–Sant'Anna, de Chaisemartin–D'Haultfœuille, Sun–Abraham) instead of bare two-way fixed effects. Bare TWFE on staggered timing is a near-certain reject at CEQ.

Use when drafting the response letter for a revise-and-resubmit (R&R) at 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) — where reviewers are typically field-trained and press hardest on identification, modern-DID compliance, and inference. Structures a point-by-point reply that concedes or rebuts with evidence. Use only after the manuscript itself has been revised.

Use for the pre-submission preflight to 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) — checking the online system (oaj.pku.edu.cn / ccj.pku.edu.cn), in-text author-date citation style (页内夹注, not footnotes), abstract limits (≤200字 中文 / ≤100词 英文), three keywords, three JEL codes, the 15,000-word length cap, reproducibility, and double-blind anonymity. Use right before submitting; verify every rule against the journal's current 投稿须知.

Use when shaping or sharpening a 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ) research question — turning data/correlation into a clean causal, model-able, internationally-legible topic that a field economist can recognize as a contribution. Use before literature review and identification.

Use when deciding which ceq-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from fit judgment through rebuttal for 《经济学(季刊)》 (China Economic Quarterly, CEQ). Routes — does not replace — the specialized skills.

Use when the identification strategy for a 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics) manuscript is multi-period / staggered DID or an event study. Mandates parallel-trends event-study plots, placebo tests, and modern heterogeneity-robust estimators (Callaway-Sant'Anna, Sun-Abraham, de Chaisemartin-D'Haultfœuille, Goodman-Bacon decomposition) whenever treatment timing varies.

Use to judge whether a manuscript fits 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics) before drafting, and to re-route if it is theory-heavy (→经济研究 / 经济学季刊), management/case/survey (→管理世界), finance-mechanism (→金融研究), or trade/open-macro (→世界经济). The journal wants empirical engineering, not pure theory or practice notes.

Use when the heterogeneity analysis of a 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics) manuscript is thin — only one crude cut (e.g. east/central/west). Pushes multi-dimensional cuts (ownership, size, industry, factor intensity, market structure, region) each tied to an economic interpretation, not just a significant subsample.

Use when the policy / institutional background section of a 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics) manuscript needs accurate detail — exact document names, effective dates, pilot batches and city lists, and the assignment rule that justifies the quasi-experiment. Sloppy policy detail is a frequent desk-reject trigger here.

Use when the literature section of a 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics) manuscript is a citation pile instead of a critical review that locates the gap. Enforces gap-driven 文献述评 (not 罗列), recent-five-year frontier coverage, and a clean separation between literature review and theory analysis.

Use when a 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics) manuscript needs mechanism evidence. Prefers split-channel and moderation (heterogeneity-by-mechanism) regressions and treats the three-step mediation method as suspect — per Jiang (2022, CIE 2022:5), the journal's own methodological-norm guide. Use after the main effect is identified.

Use when the policy-implication / 启示 section of a 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics) manuscript is vague. Forces ACTIONABLE recommendations — who, at which node, does what — derived from the findings and heterogeneity. This concreteness is the key difference from 《经济研究》, where implications stay at the significance level.

Use when responding to external-review / R&R comments for 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics). Builds a point-by-point response letter that prioritizes identification and the robustness arms race, revises the manuscript first, and supplies the data/code the journal requires. Do not generate the letter before the text is revised.

Use when building or auditing the robustness section of a 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics) manuscript — the journal's signature "arms race." Drives an exhaustive checklist: alternative measures, dropping competing policies, PSM-DID, changing windows/samples, placebo, winsorizing, and explicitly ruling out alternative explanations. Doing this thoroughly is the norm, not the exception.

Use for the pre-submission preflight to 《中国工业经济》 (China Industrial Economics) — checking length (~2.5万字/18+ pages), 450–500-char abstract + 3–5 keywords, the five abstract components, three-level headings, footnote (页下注) + 实引 reference conventions, the data/code-on-acceptance requirement, double-blind anonymity, and the online system. Verify every rule against the journal's current 投稿（修改）指南.