zhukang 1c7abd81d1 All 310 Manus skill-hub community skills as a Kortix marketplace registry

- 310 registry:skill items, 1528 files, 7 categories (hub tags)
- registry.json generated by @kortix/registry buildRegistry
- nested SKILL.md in sn-da-* renamed SUBSKILL.md (no phantom skills)
- provenance + licenses: SOURCES.md

2026-09-15 13:37:20 +08:00

3.3 KiB

Raw Permalink Blame History

Base Writing Rules: Economics

Version: 1.0 Scope: Applied empirical, theory, structural, mixed-method economics papers

Core Principles

Reader first. Write for PhD economists who are NOT specialists in your subfield.
Triangular style: most important information first, details after.
One central contribution. State it in one paragraph. Everything serves it.
Say what you FIND, not what you LOOK FOR. Give actual coefficients, magnitudes, facts.
Every sentence must earn its place. Cut anything that adds no information.

Abstract

Structure (100–150 words): what paper does → how → main finding → why it matters.

Be concrete: state the finding, not "I find interesting results."
No literature references in abstract.
Past tense for findings. Present tense for context.
For empirical: include identification strategy keyword (DiD, IV, RDD, RCT).
For theory: name the mechanism or key economic force.

Introduction

Lead with a striking fact, puzzle, or bold claim grounded in data.
Do NOT open with: "The literature on X has grown," philosophy, or a quotation.
State main result early — actual coefficient or theoretical insight — not a vague preview.
Literature review belongs in the introduction, not as a standalone section.
Discuss only the 5–10 closest papers. Explain what they did AND what limitation remains.
≤6 paragraphs. 3–5 pages maximum.

Sequence: Hook → problem + stakes → gap → main results → literature + value added → roadmap (optional).

Do not:

Bury the main result past page 3.
List papers without telling a story.
Use "To the best of our knowledge" — if you've done your homework, state what you know.

Methods / Model

Intuition before formalism. Describe the economic environment in plain English before math.
Every assumption must earn its place: state which are essential vs. simplifying.
Proofs belong in appendix unless they illuminate the mechanism.
State each proposition in plain English, then formally.
Only number equations you reference later.

Results

Report the mechanism, not just the sign of the coefficient.
Quantify: "large" and "small" are meaningless without context.
Effect sizes matter as much as statistical significance.
Robustness checks after main result, not before.

Discussion

What do results mean for the broader question? What does this change?
Stay grounded in what the model/data actually shows. Do not overclaim.

Conclusion

Do not repeat the paper.
State what you have learned and what it implies.
No new claims not established in results.

Language

Active voice preferred. Passive acceptable when actor is irrelevant.
Sentences under ~30 words preferred.
Cut hollow hedging: "somewhat", "rather", "fairly" without benchmark.
Keep strong hedging when genuine uncertainty exists: "we cannot rule out..."
No rhetorical questions.

Anti-Pattern List (always remove)

"This paper explores..."
"In this study, we aim to..."
"It is worth noting that..."
"Furthermore," / "Moreover," / "Additionally," as filler transitions
"contributes to the growing literature on..."
"Taken together, these findings suggest..."
"Future research should explore..."
"In conclusion, this paper has shown..."
"Our results highlight the importance of..."
"This paper is the first to..."

3.3 KiB Raw Permalink Blame History Unescape Escape