Skills DirectorySkills Directory
SkillsLearnSecurityCategoriesDocsCommunityBlog
Sign InSubmit Skill
Skills Directory

Security-tested agent skills for Claude, coding agents, and AI workflows.

Directory

  • Browse Skills
  • All Skills A–Z
  • Claude Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • Agent Skills
  • Categories
  • Authors
  • Submit a Skill

Learn

  • Learn Hub
  • Install Claude Skills
  • Write SKILL.md
  • Skills vs MCP
  • Directories Compared

Security

  • Security
  • Methodology
  • Secure Claude Skills
  • Security Badges

Company

  • About
  • Community
  • Blog
  • API Docs
  • Advertise

2026 Skills Directory. All rights reserved.

ProTermsPrivacyRefunds
Back to skills

Joe Identification Strategy

ASecurity

Use when the assumptions, regularity conditions, identification result, and asymptotic theory of a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) methodological paper are the bottleneck. Stress-tests the formal core — what is assumed, what is proved, and how general it is — before tables are drafted.

1,052 stars
0 votes
0 copies
0 views
Added 6/5/2026
ai-agentsgo

Security Analysis

A100/100

Scanned 6/5/2026

Install to Claude Code

$npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill joe-identification-strategy --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Joe Identification Strategy?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Joe Identification Strategy
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/brycewang-stanford-joe-identification-strategy/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-joe-identification-strategy)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.

Download with Pro
Files
SKILL.md
---
name: joe-identification-strategy
description: Use when the assumptions, regularity conditions, identification result, and asymptotic theory of a Journal of Econometrics (JoE) methodological paper are the bottleneck. Stress-tests the formal core — what is assumed, what is proved, and how general it is — before tables are drafted.
---

# Identification & Asymptotic Strategy (joe-identification-strategy)

## When to trigger

- The estimand is not formally identified, or identification is asserted not proved
- Regularity conditions are stated loosely or are non-primitive (they smuggle in the conclusion)
- The limiting distribution / convergence rate is claimed without a derivation path
- You are unsure the result is general enough, or whether the conditions are verifiable

## The JoE formal bar

At the *Journal of Econometrics*, "identification strategy" means the **formal core**: the assumptions under which the estimand is identified, the estimator is consistent, and inference is valid. The house norm is **mathematical rigor** — proofs and asymptotic derivations are expected, and referees probe whether conditions are *primitive and verifiable*, whether the asymptotics are honest, and whether the result generalizes beyond a convenient special case. This is methodology, not applied causal design: the deliverable is theorems plus the Monte Carlo that shows the asymptotics bite in finite samples.

## The formal-core checklist

### 1. Identification

- State the **estimand** and the model precisely. Prove **identification** (the map from the distribution of observables to the parameter is unique) before estimation. Distinguish point vs. partial identification.
- If identification is weak or fails on a boundary (weak instruments, near-unit-root, near-singular Jacobian), say so and provide identification-robust inference rather than hiding it.

### 2. Assumptions / regularity conditions

- List each assumption and label it (moment existence, smoothness, mixing/dependence, bandwidth/rate conditions, rank/full-rank, parameter-space compactness).
- For each: is it **primitive** (on the DGP/data) or **high-level** (on objects derived from the estimator)? Prefer primitive; justify any high-level condition and verify it for a leading example.
- Check none of them silently assume the conclusion (e.g., assuming the very uniform convergence you need).

### 3. Asymptotic theory

- Lay out the proof path: consistency (ULLN / argmax) → rate → asymptotic distribution (CLT / Delta method / empirical-process tools) → variance estimator.
- State the **convergence rate** and the **limiting distribution**; derive or cite the **standard-error / variance estimator** and prove it is consistent.
- Handle nuisance parameters, tuning (bandwidth, lag length, penalty), and any first-stage estimation (Neyman-orthogonality / influence-function corrections) explicitly.

### 4. Generality

- State the **class** of models/DGPs the result covers; flag what is excluded and why.
- Show the result **nests** or extends known cases (a sanity check and a positioning device).

### 5. Proof exposition

- Map theorems → lemmas; keep the main text's intuition, push routine algebra to an appendix.
- Make each step auditable; a referee should reconstruct the argument without guessing.

## Numerical / Monte Carlo confirmation (light here, full in joe-data-analysis)

- Cross-check a derived asymptotic variance against a high-replication Monte Carlo; a mismatch usually signals an algebra error. The full size/power design lives in `joe-data-analysis`.

## Anti-patterns

- "Under standard regularity conditions" with no list and no verification
- High-level assumptions chosen so the theorem is one line — but unverifiable in any real model
- Asserting asymptotic normality with no derivation or no consistent variance estimator
- Ignoring weak/partial identification when the design is on its boundary

## Output format

```
【Estimand & model】...
【Identification】point/partial; proof sketch
【Assumptions】[A1 primitive, A2 high-level (justified), ...]
【Asymptotics】rate + limiting distribution + variance estimator
【Generality】class covered; what is excluded; nested cases
【Proof plan】theorems → lemmas → appendix
【Next step】joe-data-analysis
```

Attribution

brycewang-stanfordbrycewang-stanford
View sourceMore from brycewang-stanford →
SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Know which skills are safe — weekly.

Best new skills + every skill we flagged as malicious. From the team that scanned 103,619.

Join free

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Know which skills are safe — weekly.

Best new skills + every skill we flagged as malicious. From the team that scanned 103,619.

Join free

Related Skills

Caveman

Ultra-compressed communication mode that cuts output tokens while keeping technical accuracy. Levels: lite, full, ultra and the wenyan variants. Use for /caveman, "caveman mode", "talk like caveman", "be brief" or "less tokens".

1066601 votes

Hyperplan

Adversarial multi-agent planning skill. Self-orchestrates 5 hostile category members (unspecified-low, unspecified-high, deep, ultrabrain, artistry) via team-mode for ruthless cross-critique debate, distills only the defensible insights, then MANDATORILY hands the distilled insight bundle to the `plan` agent for executable plan formalization. Use when planning needs maximum rigor and surfacing of weak assumptions, blind spots, and over-engineering. Triggers: 'hyperplan', 'hpp', '/hyperplan', ...

693161 votes

Mcp Code Execution

Routes multi-tool workflows through MCP servers for large datasets and pipelines. Use when Bash tool overhead is limiting throughput on data-heavy tasks.

3351 votes

catchup

Recovers the conversation and failed tool calls of a previous Codex, Claude Code, Antigravity, Cline, Copilot CLI, Cursor, DeepSeek Harness, Kimi, OpenCode, Pi Agent, or ZCode session. Use when the user says "catch up", "what did the last session do", "get me up to speed", "I switched agents", asks to recover/summarize a previous session before continuing, or asks to diagnose or report a catchup failure. Do NOT use for the current conversation, git history, or any non-agent log.

651 votes

math-skill

A comprehensive mathematical reasoning skill for AI assistants — handles arithmetic to research-level problems with rigorous step-by-step reasoning, systematic verification, and transparent uncertainty handling

381 votes
View all in ai-agents →