car-topic-selection — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited car-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.
CAR welcomes "interesting and intellectually rigorous work in all topic areas of accounting, using any appropriate method, and based in any discipline or research tradition." This is a genuine big-tent mandate: financial reporting, auditing and assurance, managerial/cost accounting, taxation, disclosure, accounting information in capital markets, governance, and accounting's role in organizations and society are all in scope. The defining test is therefore not method but whether the question advances understanding of accounting — its production, properties, use, or consequences. A question that merely uses accounting data to answer a pure-finance asset-pricing or pure-economics question is a weaker fit than one whose answer changes how we understand accounting itself.
CAR's broad scope means the same topic can be pursued several ways; choose the tradition that can actually deliver the inference:
| If the question is about… | Lean toward… |
|---|---|
| Capital-market consequences of reporting/disclosure | Archival / capital-markets empirical |
| How preparers, auditors, or investors process information | Experiment (causal, mechanism) |
| Optimal contracting, disclosure incentives, equilibria | Analytical / modeling |
| Practice inside firms, audit teams, or standard-setting | Field study / qualitative |
| A new construct's measurement or external validity | Survey, or multi-method triangulation |
car-methods).Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the accounting construct, setting, identification or theory, and disclosure/market/organizational implication; then test whether the manuscript addresses accounting reviewers who expect accounting-specific constructs, credible design, and contribution to reporting, auditing, tax, or governance debates.
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.【Question】one sentence: phenomenon / who / consequence ...
【CAR fit】advances accounting understanding? broad-tent area ...
【Tradition】archival / experimental / analytical / field / qualitative — why ...
【Tension】competing predictions or puzzle ...
【Feasibility】data/instrument; ethics if human subjects ...
【Next step】car-theory-development~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.