Individual skill
ecopol-referee-strategy
Use when preparing an Economic Policy (EP) manuscript for its panel review — the two named discussants and the conference debate that replace standard anonymous refereeing. War-games the discussants; it does not invent evidence or citations.
Economic-Policy-Skills/skills/ecopol-referee-strategy/SKILL.md
Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- 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)
- 1,411
- 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
- engineering 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 · 5,110 bytes
Read excerpt
# Panel & Discussant Strategy (ecopol-referee-strategy)
## When to trigger
- A paper has been (or is likely to be) invited to present at an EP biannual conference
- You need to anticipate the two discussants and the live panel debate before standing up
- A coauthor assumes EP runs anonymous refereeing and is preparing the wrong way
- The paper is strong academically but you have not stress-tested the policy angle a policy discussant will press
- You must decide what to fix *before* the conference vs. what to commit to revising after
## EP review is a panel, not a referee pool — plan for it
This is the most EP-specific skill in the pack, because EP **does not run standard double-blind refereeing.** Papers are selected by the **Managing Editor / Panel**, presented at a **biannual conference (summer and winter)**, where **two invited discussants** — chosen to bring an **academic** and a **policy** perspective — act as the referees, debate the paper live in front of the panel and audience, and whose **written comments are published alongside the final paper** (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准). This changes the strategy in three ways: