aeja-workflow — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited aeja-workflow (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
This is the router. It tells you *which aeja- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics (AEJ: Applied) — the American Economic Association's quarterly journal for empirical applied microeconomics with credible causal identification: labor, development, health, education, public, urban, environmental, and household finance. AEJ: Applied is empirical-first: a clean research design carrying a substantive economic question, with theory used to interpret and structure* rather than to lead.
Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as AEJ: Applied. Operational tells that you are at AEJ: Applied and not a sibling: review is single-blind (author identities are visible to referees); submission is via the AEA ScholarOne system with fee tiers by AEA membership and country-income status; JEL codes and a 100-word abstract are required; and the signature stable differentiator is the AEA Data and Code Availability Policy — administered by the AEA Data Editor (Lars Vilhuber), accepted papers deposit data + code to the AEA Data and Code Repository on openICPSR, and the package is checked for reproducibility before publication. On 2026-06-20 the editor page listed Raymond Fisman (Boston University) as Editor, with coeditors Leah Boustan, Marika Cabral, Peter Hull, Xavier Jaravel, and Nicholas Ryan. Check live AEA pages for fees and editors before submission-week advice.
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Unsure the paper fits AEJ: Applied vs AER / AEJ: Policy / a field journal | aeja-topic-selection |
| Contribution vs. the literature is fuzzy or undersold | aeja-literature-positioning |
| Causal design rests on OLS+controls, TWFE on staggered timing, or a weak IV | aeja-identification |
| A model is needed to interpret estimates or structure a mechanism | aeja-theory-model |
| Results not shown robust to specification, sample, inference | aeja-robustness |
| Exhibits are dense; main result not legible in one table/figure | aeja-tables-figures |
| Prose buries the design; abstract/intro do not land | aeja-writing-style |
| Data/code deposit, README, openICPSR prep for the AEA Data Editor | aeja-replication-package |
| Want to anticipate referee objections before submitting | aeja-referee-strategy |
| Ready to submit via the AEA portal; need a preflight | aeja-submission |
| Received an R&R; need a response-letter strategy | aeja-rebuttal |
aeja-topic-selection — lock the applied-micro question and venue fitaeja-literature-positioning — stake the marginal contributionaeja-identification — make the data-to-causal-estimate mapping credibleaeja-theory-model — add only the theory that interprets/structures the estimateaeja-robustness — show the headline survives specification, sample, inferenceaeja-tables-figures — make the main result legible in one exhibitaeja-writing-style — make the design and estimate land (abstract + intro last)aeja-replication-package — assemble the openICPSR package for the AEA Data Editoraeja-referee-strategy — pre-empt the objections this design invitesaeja-submission — AEA portal preflight (single-blind front matter, JEL, fee)aeja-rebuttal — after the R&Raeja-writing-style is a late-stage polish; do not rewrite the intro before identification and robustness settle.aeja-replication-package)aeja-tables-figures) while the identification or headline estimate is still movingAEJ: Applied spans several applied-micro designs, and the first bottleneck differs by design. Read the archetype, then enter the chain at the right link.
| Archetype | Likely first bottleneck | Enter at |
|---|---|---|
| field experiment / RCT (own data) | pre-registration, balance, attrition, estimand | aeja-identification → aeja-robustness |
| quasi-experiment (DID / event study) | staggered-timing bias, parallel-trends credibility | aeja-identification |
| regression discontinuity | density manipulation, bandwidth, bias-corrected CIs | aeja-identification → aeja-robustness |
| IV / shift-share | first-stage strength, exclusion, exposure design | aeja-identification |
| descriptive / measurement with a clean question | framing the contribution without a causal overclaim | aeja-topic-selection → aeja-literature-positioning |
A user says: "My event study on a staggered state policy looks fine, but a referee says the two-way fixed-effects estimate is contaminated and the parallel-trends story is thin." That is two AEJ: Applied pushbacks — negative-weighting / contaminating already-treated comparisons under staggered timing and pre-trend credibility — both owned by aeja-identification, with the robustness presentation in aeja-robustness. Route there first; only once the heterogeneity-robust estimate is stable (say it settles at a 3.1pp effect, s.e. 0.9, illustrative) do you return to aeja-tables-figures and aeja-rebuttal to present and defend it.
if decision_letter_arrived: -> aeja-rebuttal
elif ready_to_submit: -> aeja-submission
elif anticipating_referees: -> aeja-referee-strategy
elif building_replication_package: -> aeja-replication-package
elif intro_or_abstract_weak: -> aeja-writing-style
elif exhibits_dense: -> aeja-tables-figures
elif results_not_robust: -> aeja-robustness
elif needs_model_to_interpret: -> aeja-theory-model
elif identification_shaky: -> aeja-identification
elif contribution_fuzzy: -> aeja-literature-positioning
else: -> aeja-topic-selection~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.