ajps-workflow — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited ajps-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.
The orchestrator for an AJPS submission. Figure out the stage and the submission type, then send the user to the matching skill. AJPS is the MPSA's flagship, Wiley-published, double-blind journal whose defining feature is mandatory third-party verification of replication materials before publication — so this router also makes sure reproducibility is engineered from the start, not bolted on at acceptance.
ajps-rebuttal)| Situation | Type | Route to |
|---|---|---|
| Full original study | Article (<= 10,000 words) | normal pipeline below |
| A methodology advance or a meta-analysis | Research Note (<= 4,000 words) | normal pipeline, tighter scope |
| Critique / correction of a paper already published in AJPS | Correspondence (<= 4,000 words) | ajps-literature-positioning + ajps-data-analysis |
The Research Note is not a short empirical paper — at AJPS it is reserved for methodology (including methodology in normative theory) and meta-analyses. Do not mis-route a small empirical study into it.
Idea / fit? -> ajps-topic-selection
Where does it sit in the field? -> ajps-literature-positioning
What's the argument? -> ajps-theory-building
Is the design identified? -> ajps-research-design
Are the analyses sound? -> ajps-data-analysis
Are the exhibits clear? -> ajps-tables-figures
Does it read well + fit caps? -> ajps-writing-style
Will the code re-run for a verifier? -> ajps-replication-and-verification
How will it be judged? -> ajps-review-process
Ready to submit? -> ajps-submission
Got an R&R / decision? -> ajps-rebuttaltopic-selection -> literature-positioning -> theory-building -> research-design -> data-analysis -> tables-figures -> writing-style -> replication-and-verification -> review-process -> submission -> rebuttal
Iterate: theory <-> design <-> analysis usually loops several times. Critically, start the replication-and-verification package while you analyze — at acceptance an independent verifier re-runs your code, and an unscripted analysis cannot be fixed quickly under deadline.
Run this as a concrete capability pass. First lock the political theory, design leverage, measurement validity, and scope condition; then test whether the manuscript addresses political-science reviewers who expect tight theory, transparent design, and a contribution that travels across political settings.
claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.【Stage】idea / positioning / theory / design / analysis / exhibits / writing / replication / review / submit / rebut
【Type】Article / Research Note (methodology|meta-analysis) / Correspondence
【Route to】ajps-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that../../resources/external_tools.md — political-science data + software by method../../resources/official-source-map.md — official AJPS URLs behind every fact in this pack~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.