Agent skill · Code Review & Quality

review-paper

Comprehensive manuscript review covering argument structure, econometric specification, citation completeness, and potential referee objections. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants substantive academic feedback on a paper — not just surface edits. Triggers include: "review my paper", "give me feedback on this draft", "what would a referee say", "anticipate referee objections", "act as a referee", "check my identification strategy", "is my argument convincing", "review this manuscript", "critique my paper", "will this pass review", or any request for deep critique of academic

brycew6m878★ · +32/wk · 1 repos on radarProfile →
claude-codecan modify filesNOASSERTION
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill review-paper --agent claude-code

Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.

Facts
Files in the skill folder: 1
SKILL.md size: 6 KB
Bundled scripts: none
Allowed tools: ReadGrepGlobWriteTask
Path: skills/15-Felpix-Studios-social-science-research/skills/review-paper/SKILL.md
Open the folder on GitHub →
Where it comes from
Stars: 3,244
Language: Stata
Read our review of the source →

Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.

From the SKILL.md

# Manuscript Review Produce a thorough, constructive review of an academic manuscript — the kind of report a top-journal referee would write. **Input:** `$ARGUMENTS` — path to a paper (.tex, .pdf, or .qmd), or a filename in `manuscripts/` or `references/papers/`. --- ## Steps 1. **Locate and read the manuscript.** Check: - Direct path from `$ARGUMENTS` - `manuscripts/$ARGUMENTS` - `references/pape

More from Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills
All skills →
About this skill
What does the review-paper skill do?

Comprehensive manuscript review covering argument structure, econometric specification, citation completeness, and potential referee objections. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants substantive academic feedback on a paper — not just surface edits. Triggers include: "review my paper", "give me feedback on this draft", "what would a referee say", "anticipate referee objections", "act as a referee", "check my identification strategy", "is my argument convincing", "review this manuscript", "critique my paper", "will this pass review", or any request for deep critique of academic

How do I install it?

Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill review-paper --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.

Where does this skill come from?

From brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills, a repository with 3,244 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.

Is a popular skill a good skill?

Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.

Keep going