joc-workflow — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited joc-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 a JoC submission. Figure out the stage and the format, then send the user to the matching skill. JoC is the flagship, field-wide journal of the International Communication Association — the router's first job is to make sure the paper is pitched to communication research broadly, not just one subfield or platform.
joc-rebuttal)| Situation | Format | Route to |
|---|---|---|
| Full original study, broad significance | Original article (main doc ≤ 35 pages) | normal pipeline below |
| Short, argument-driven contribution | JoC Forum (3,000–6,000 words) | normal pipeline, tighter scope |
| Responding to a themed call | Special issue | joc-topic-selection (fit to the call) + pipeline |
| Prospective design, data not yet collected | preregister first | joc-open-science-and-transparency early |
If the design is prospective, preregister and plan Open Science Badge materials before collecting data — note the preregistration in the cover letter at submission.
Idea / fit? → joc-topic-selection
Where does it sit in the field? → joc-literature-positioning
What's the argument? → joc-theory-building
Is the design defensible? → joc-research-design
Are the analyses sound? → joc-data-analysis
Are the exhibits clear? → joc-tables-figures
Does it read for the field? → joc-writing-style
Data statement & open science? → joc-open-science-and-transparency
How will it be judged? → joc-review-process
Ready to submit? → joc-submission
Got an R&R / decision? → joc-rebuttaltopic-selection → literature-positioning → theory-building → research-design → data-analysis → tables-figures → writing-style → open-science-and-transparency → review-process → submission → rebuttal
Iterate: most papers loop theory ↔ design ↔ analysis several times before writing-style.
Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the communication process, platform/media setting, construct measurement, and study design; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: communication reviewers who balance theory, media context, measurement, and social implications.
claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.resources/official-source-map.md has been checked for volatile rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.【Stage】idea / positioning / theory / design / analysis / exhibits / writing / transparency / review / submit / rebut
【Format】Original article / JoC Forum / Special issue
【Route to】joc-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that../../resources/external_tools.md — communication data + software by method../../resources/official-source-map.md — official JoC URLs behind every fact in this pack~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.