Individual skill
ylj-argument-structure
Use when organizing the Parts of a The Yale Law Journal (YLJ) article into a doctrine→theory→normative arc. It sequences the argument and pressure-tests counterarguments; it does not polish prose (use ylj-writing-style) or format citations (use ylj-sources-and-bluebook).
Yale-Law-Journal-Skills/skills/ylj-argument-structure/SKILL.md
Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- Yes
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Network or broad shell
- Last checked
- Nov 9, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 1,403
- Repository last updated
- Sep 27, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- academic-writing Repository topic
- agent-skills Repository topic
- journal Repository topic
- academic-research Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- anthropic Repository topic
- awesome-list Repository topic
- claude Repository topic
- claude-code Repository topic
- economics Repository topic
- legal Derived category
- writing Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 4,477 bytes
Read excerpt
# Argument Structure (ylj-argument-structure)
A YLJ Article is a sustained legal argument, not a report. The dominant arc is
**doctrine → theory → normative**: show what the law *is* (and where it breaks), explain *why* with a
framework, then say what *should* change. This skill sequences the Parts and stress-tests
counterarguments. It assumes the claim and novelty are settled (`ylj-thesis-and-contribution`,
`ylj-preemption-check`).
## When to trigger
- The claim is set but the Parts have no logical spine
- A reader reaches Part III without knowing why Parts I–II were necessary
- The normative payoff arrives without the descriptive/theoretical groundwork to support it
- Reviewers (or your own outline) reveal an unaddressed counterargument