Use when revising an American Economic Review: Insights (AER: Insights) short-format manuscript to lead with the result, fit the hard word cap (7,000 words minus 200 per exhibit), and write the ≤100-word abstract. Enforces the length budget and the lead-with-the-result arc; it does not change the analysis.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill aeri-writing-style --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Aeri Writing Style?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-aeri-writing-style)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: aeri-writing-style
description: Use when revising an American Economic Review: Insights (AER: Insights) short-format manuscript to lead with the result, fit the hard word cap (7,000 words minus 200 per exhibit), and write the ≤100-word abstract. Enforces the length budget and the lead-with-the-result arc; it does not change the analysis.
---
# Writing Style — Lead With the Result, Fit the Cap (aeri-writing-style)
## When to trigger
- The intro buries the headline result under setup, literature, or methods
- The draft is over the word cap and needs cutting, not just polishing
- The abstract exceeds 100 words or does not state the result
- Late-stage polish once identification, robustness, and exhibits have settled
## The two hard constraints (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准)
- **Word cap:** main text **≤7,000 words with no exhibits; each exhibit subtracts 200 words; ≤5 exhibits** (so ≥6,000 at the cap). The count includes body, footnotes, endnotes, and in-paper appendices; it **excludes** title, authors, abstract, acknowledgement footnote, references, exhibits, and the Supplemental Appendix. **Over the cap = returned unreviewed.**
- **Abstract: ≤100 words.** It must state the result, not promise it.
Treat the cap as a design constraint from the first draft, not a final trim. Every sentence competes with the insight for space.
## The AER: Insights arc (lead with the result)
Unlike a long paper that builds to its result, an AER: Insights paper **states the answer in the first paragraph**:
1. **Sentence 1–2:** the question and the **headline result with its magnitude and uncertainty** (estimate + SE / confidence set), no asterisks.
2. **Sentence 3–4:** why it matters / the prior it overturns (the surprise).
3. **One short paragraph:** how it is identified (the design or the model's key restriction), in plain terms.
4. **One sentence:** the single most important robustness/scope caveat, with a pointer to the appendix.
5. **Brief roadmap or none** — the paper is short enough that heavy signposting wastes words.
The body then delivers exactly that arc: setup (tight), identification, result, the one or two checks, a short discussion. No second result, no survey, no extended derivations in-text.
## Cutting to the cap (in priority order)
1. **Cut secondary results** to the Supplemental Appendix ([`aeri-robustness`](../aeri-robustness/SKILL.md)).
2. **Compress the literature** to one or two paragraphs ([`aeri-literature-positioning`](../aeri-literature-positioning/SKILL.md)).
3. **Move proofs/derivations and estimation detail** to the appendix ([`aeri-theory-model`](../aeri-theory-model/SKILL.md)).
4. **Delete throat-clearing** ("It is well known that…", over-signposted roadmaps).
5. **Merge exhibits** to reclaim 200 words each ([`aeri-tables-figures`](../aeri-tables-figures/SKILL.md)).
6. **Tighten prose** last — shorter sentences, fewer hedges, active voice.
## Writing the ≤100-word abstract
- State **the result with its magnitude**, the setting, and the identification in one breath.
- No literature, no "we examine"; say what you found.
- Verify the count; 100 words is a hard ceiling.
## Checklist
- [ ] **First paragraph states the headline result** with magnitude + SE/CI (no asterisks)
- [ ] Main text **under 7,000 − 200×(#exhibits)** words (counted per AEA scope rules)
- [ ] Abstract **≤100 words** and states the result
- [ ] One idea only in-text; secondary material in the Supplemental Appendix
- [ ] Literature compressed to ≤2 paragraphs; no in-text survey
- [ ] No significance asterisks/boldface anywhere
- [ ] Roadmap minimal or absent; throat-clearing removed
## Anti-patterns
- A long build-up that reveals the result only in Section 4
- Trimming prose while leaving a second result in-text (cut the result first)
- An abstract over 100 words, or one that promises rather than reports
- Counting the word budget only at the end and discovering you are 2,000 over
- AER-length signposting in a short paper
## Output format
```
【First paragraph】states result + magnitude + SE/CI? [Y/N]
【Word count】main text = __ ; cap = 7000 − 200×__ = __ ; under? [Y/N]
【Abstract】__ words (≤100?) and states the result? [Y/N]
【Cut list to hit cap】<secondary results / lit / proofs / exhibits merged>
【No-asterisk check】[Y/N]
【Next step】aeri-replication-package
```
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!