jar-methods — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited jar-methods (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.
JAR's defining methodology is large-sample empirical-archival capital-markets research (financial-statement and market-data econometrics in the Ball-Brown lineage). The journal also publishes experimental, analytical/modeling, and field-study work, and the Registered Reports track is well suited to higher-outcome-risk designs that require new data collection. The bar across all of them is credible identification: a referee must believe the estimate reflects the economic effect you claim, not an omitted variable, reverse causality, or selection.
| Theoretical claim | Identification that earns it |
|---|---|
| Effect of a rule/standard | Staggered or sharp adoption as a natural experiment (modern DiD) |
| Effect at a threshold | Regression discontinuity (e.g., index inclusion, size cutoffs) |
| Effect of an endogenous firm choice | IV/2SLS with a defensible instrument, or a shock to the choice |
| Information content of a disclosure | Short-window event study around the release |
| Causal mechanism under control | Experiment (lab/online/field), often paired with archival evidence |
Specify the sample frame, screens, and data vintages (Compustat/CRSP/I/B/E/S/Audit Analytics/EDGAR). Because JAR requires posted data and code, design the pipeline to be top-to-bottom reproducible from raw extracts, recording exclusion rules and access dates.
For the empirical / causal lane, estimate and audit rather than only specify. Full map: execution-with-mcp. JAR is archival/empirical accounting; foreground identification around disclosure and regulation shocks, with modern DiD where adoption is staggered.
detect_design → recommend → fit with as_handle=true → audit_result toenumerate the checks the design owes.
callaway_santanna / sun_abraham + bacon_decomposition+ honest_did_from_result. IV: effective_f_test + anderson_rubin_ci. RDD: rdrobust + mccrary_test.
romano_wolf for the many-outcomefamily-wise correction reviewers expect.
Match the toolchain to the reviewer pool, and report the effect size the venue wants. A run end-to-end (synthetic data, real returns) is in the JF execution walkthrough.
【Design】archival-NE / RD / IV / event-study / experiment / analytical / field
【Identifying variation】shock / threshold / instrument / manipulation
【Binding threat】OVB / reverse causality / selection / measurement — addressed by ...
【Diagnostics planned】pre-trends / bandwidth / first-stage / balance ...
【Constructs & measures】definitions + validation
【Sample & reproducibility】frame, screens, vintages; data/code pipeline
【Next step】jar-data-analysis../../resources/official-source-map.md — official JAR/Chicago Booth/Wiley URLs (accessed 2026-06-01)../../resources/external_tools.md — archival data sources and identification tooling (reghdfe / csdid / rdrobust / ivreghdfe)~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.