aeri-topic-selection — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited aeri-topic-selection (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.
AER: Insights publishes short, self-contained papers built around a single important, well-executed idea. The decision is not "is this good?" but "is there exactly ONE crisp, surprising, well-identified insight that can stand alone in a short paper at AER-level importance?" Three filters:
| Symptom | Better venue |
|---|---|
| Multiple inter-dependent results that need each other | AER (long, multi-result flagship) |
| One result but field-specific, not general interest | AEJ: Applied / Micro / Macro / Policy |
| Incremental / a robustness note on existing work | a field journal or a comment |
| Pure methods with no substantive payoff in a short paper | a methods/econometrics journal |
aeri-identification) — a clean insight with a shaky design is not publishable short, because there is no room to defend a weak design.| Archetype | The single insight is… | Failure mode |
|---|---|---|
| One clean causal estimate | a single headline effect from a credible design | reporting every heterogeneity split in-text |
| A striking new fact / measurement | one important fact a non-specialist did not know | a descriptive paper with no single takeaway |
| A sharp theory result | one surprising theorem / impossibility | a general framework with the result as a corollary |
| A method that flips an answer | the substantive answer it changes, in few pages | the method shown without a substantive payoff |
A fictional project has (a) a clean RCT effect of posted wages on women's applications, (b) a heterogeneity split by occupation, and (c) a structural extension on wage offers. The AER: Insights paper is (a) alone — one surprising, general-interest, cleanly identified effect. (b) and (c) go to the Supplemental Appendix or a separate paper. Compressing all three into one short paper would be a "mini-AER" and likely a reject; the discipline is to make (a) the entire paper and defend it superbly in few pages.
If you cannot pass all three filters — single insight, AER-level importance, self-containment — the honest move is to route elsewhere (AER for multi-result, an AEJ for field interest) rather than force-fit. The fast, no-R&R process (aeri-referee-strategy) punishes a borderline fit with a quick reject.
【One-sentence insight】<single headline object>
【Importance】why a non-specialist cares (general interest, AER-level)
【Prior overturned】<belief the result corrects>
【Fits short format?】core argument under cap, rest to appendix? [Y/N]
【Venue check】AER: Insights vs AER vs AEJ — chosen because […]
【Next step】aeri-literature-positioning~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.