Use when drafting or polishing an Agricultural Systems (AgSy) manuscript so it reads clearly for a systems-science audience, follows the journal's format, and meets front-matter requirements (abstract <= 250 words, Highlights, graphical abstract). Research papers run to about 8,000 words (no hard cap). Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.
Scanned 6/4/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill agsy-writing-style --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Agsy Writing Style?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-agsy-writing-style)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: agsy-writing-style
description: Use when drafting or polishing an Agricultural Systems (AgSy) manuscript so it reads clearly for a systems-science audience, follows the journal's format, and meets front-matter requirements (abstract <= 250 words, Highlights, graphical abstract). Research papers run to about 8,000 words (no hard cap). Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.
---
# Writing Style (agsy-writing-style)
An AgSy paper must be readable by a broad **systems-science** audience — agronomists, modellers,
economists, and environmental scientists — and prepared with the journal's front matter. This skill is
about communicating a systems analysis clearly and meeting Elsevier's format, not about generating
claims.
## When to trigger
- Drafting the introduction, framing the contribution, or final polish
- Writing the **≤ 250-word abstract**, the **Highlights**, or the **graphical abstract**
- Tightening a long methods/results section toward the ~8,000-word guideline
- Aligning references and format to the journal's style before submission
## Reach the systems-science audience
1. **Front-load the systems contribution.** By the end of the introduction the reader knows the system,
the interaction/trade-off in question, the modelling approach, and why the result matters. Don't make
a reader dig for the "so what."
2. **Define the system early.** State boundary, components, and hierarchical level so a non-specialist
in your exact subsystem can follow (see `agsy-systems-framing-and-modeling`).
3. **Explain the model in plain terms first**, then in detail. A reader should grasp what the model does
before meeting its equations.
4. **Argument-first prose.** Lead with the systems insight; use model output and statistics to support
it. Avoid "the model shows…" without saying what it shows about the system and why it matters.
5. **Signpost.** Clear IMRaD-style structure so a reader can navigate framing → model → evaluation →
trade-offs → implications.
## Format & front matter (verify current requirements)
- **Abstract**: **≤ 250 words**, stating purpose, principal results, and major conclusions.
- **Highlights**: a few short bullet points capturing the core systems findings.
- **Graphical abstract**: one figure summarizing the work for an interdisciplinary audience — often a
conceptual system diagram or a trade-off result.
- **References**: format to the journal's style; manage with Zotero/Mendeley/BibTeX (Elsevier
`elsarticle` for LaTeX).
- **Declarations**: CRediT roles, declaration of competing interest, ORCID (see `agsy-submission`).
## Length discipline (research paper ~8,000 words; no hard cap)
- Move full calibration tables, parameter lists, and exhaustive scenario grids to supplementary material.
- Cut throat-clearing and literature dumps; engage the systems debate, not every paper.
- Prefer one decisive trade-off figure to three redundant tables.
## Anti-patterns
- An intro that never states the systems contribution or the trade-off at stake
- An abstract over 250 words, or one that hides the result; missing Highlights / graphical abstract
- Dropping a model's equations on the reader before explaining what it does
- Describing a single factor as if it were a system; burying the interaction
- Mixed reference styles or missing declarations
## Output format
```
【Systems contribution stated by end of intro?】[Y/N]
【System defined early?】boundary + components + level? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (≤250)
【Highlights + graphical abstract】prepared? [Y/N]
【Length】near ~8,000 words; extras moved to supplementary? [Y/N]
【References + declarations】styled + CRediT/COI/ORCID ready? [Y/N]
【Next】agsy-impact-and-implications
```
## Supplementary resources
- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — reference managers and Elsevier typesetting tools
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — abstract cap, Highlights, graphical abstract, declarations
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!